Resources

In this paper, authors draw upon the 2016 and 2020 Cooperative Election Study to analyze the likelihood that Trump supporters: (1) voted by mail, (2) self-reported voting by mail, and (3) self-reported not voting by mail when they did (misreporting VBM). In 2020, Trump supporters were markedly less likely to cast a VBM ballot and were also significantly more likely to disclaim voting by mail when they actually did.

The survey included an expansive set of disability questions and validated voter turnout responses against state voter files. The analyses reveal a high disability incidence; large disability turnout gaps; and even greater gaps estimated with validated compared to reported turnout. Much smaller turnout gaps and better voting experiences are found in the states that conduct their elections with all-mail voting.

This research's findings suggest that signature validation, which serves as a primary safeguard for mail voting integrity, may be systematically influenced by underlying biases

Registered voters in some legislative districts in Los Angeles County were subjected to universal voting by mail in the March 2020 primary. This research indicate that voter turnout increased by 3 to 4 percentage points for voters who do not automatically receive a mail ballot, and the increase is generally larger for registered partisan voters than those without a party affiliation.

In this paper, authors use a national survey of poll workers from the 2022 midterm election to analyze whether there are systematic differences between experienced and inexperienced poll workers in how they manage polling sites. They finds that experienced poll workers are more likely to say that their training prepared them for the election, yet their experience also correlates with more conflicts involving poll watchers and voters. This research fills a crucial gap in understanding how poll workers' experience influences Election Day operations.

In this paper, authors explore whether reliance on algorithms or a hybrid system for verifying signatures allay or increase citizens' confidence in using them in elections. They find that respondents similarly trust automated and non-automated systems, but do not have a clear conception of the confidence threshold, set by policymakers, necessary for rejecting ballots.

This paper synthesizes best practices for in-person voting across polling place access, check-in and wait times, polling place layout and design, ballot design, and the voter experience.

This research conducts a systematic review of the European mail voting systems to identify a set of best practices for making voting by mail as easy as possible, while safeguarding the secrecy and security of the vote.

In this MS thesis, the author investigates how voting equipment type (paper ballots, optical scan, and ballot marking devices) affects voting process performance across three elections at three locations. They use observational time studies and discrete-event simulation to model how different voting systems affect voter wait times, throughput, and overall process efficiency. The author find that performance improvements from adopting newer voting technologies are inconsistent across election contexts.

This research finds evidence which implicates evaluator bias as the primary driver of racial disparities in vote by mail signature verification.

In this paper, authors invite the human factors and ergonomics community to engage with election administration research. The paper describes the complexity and scale of U.S. election administration and identifies open research challenges where human factors expertise is directly applicable, including accessible design, poll worker training, and error minimization.

This research analyzes the demographics of voters whose mail ballots are rejected in Washington and Colorado. It finds that younger voters and voters of color are more likely to have their ballots rejected due to a non-matching signature; however, almost half of these rejections are ultimately incorrect and are cured by the voter. Additional findings show that the experience of having a ballot rejected in one election, even if the issue is resolved through ballot curing, reduces the voter’s likelihood of participating in subsequent elections.