Resources

This paper examines the efficacy of post-election edits in bolstering voter confidence and whether certain aspects of audits have greater impacts than others. Authors find that how an audit is conducted is more important than what an audit finds in influencing voter evaluations of election results.

Using Michigan's voter purge database from 2014 to 2018, this analysis finds that more Democratic leaning areas, denser/more urban areas, and areas with more Black residents had higher purge rates. Notably, while these mediation effects were significant, racial composition and median income (i.e. more black and poorer communities) remained a significant factor in voter purge rates.

Even before the 2020 election, this reseach finds that voter turnout across the states is consistently higher in every general election over the past decade in states with greater shares of overall ballots cast by mail. Drawing on turnout data from the 2012-2020 Current Population Survey (CPS) and the Cooperative Election Study (CES), authors find states with greater usage of mail voting experience higher overall voter turnout.

In this paper, authors examine ballot tracking use, local election official communication related to
ballot tracking options, how ballot tracking impacts ballot rejection, and the impact of ballot
tracking on voters’ information levels and attitudes about election integrity.

The analysis implies election workers are more likely to wrongly reject valid ballots for purported signature mismatch than to correctly reject invalidly signed returns. On the other hand, research on election workers as problem-solvers suggests they may try to minimize the wrongful rejection of ballots.

While rejected mail ballots could over- or underestimate lost votes, a case study of Pennsylvania’s 2022 general election reveals at least 47% more lost votes than rejected mail ballots.

The analysis suggests that ballot drop boxes and automatic ballot notification systems are crucial for reducing the attack surface to ensure secure and reliable operations.

In this paper, authors use simulation to study how COVID-19-era polling location consolidation strategies affected voter wait times and resource allocation in Rhode Island, with lessons for future election planning.

In this PhD dissertation, Houghton develops advanced algorithmic methods to model voter arrival behavior and vote center utilization to support election resource and capacity planning. Three core contributions: (1) compares voters’ demographic characteristics across three vote center types during the 11-day voting period across multiple elections; (2) analyzes how voters choose among multiple available vote center locations by using graph-based methods to analyze network data and perform statistical community detection; and (3) uses spatial access metrics as input to a genetic algorithm to optimize location selection for vote center siting decisions.

This paper demonstrates that layout method and path directionality significantly affect average voter travel distance within a polling place and presents ways layout can be used to design more efficient in-person voting systems.

In this paper, authors provide a structured, data-driven framework to help election officials make consolidation decisions by applying it in a case study using Richland County, South Carolina data. The paper names an integer programming model, the Polling Location Consolidation Problem (PLCP), that simultaneously selects polling locations, reassigns voter precincts, and allocates resources while minimizing increases in voter travel distance.

In this paper, Michael Greenberger examines the effect of poll worker recruitment policies, local demographics and political characteristics on poll worker recruitment, finding that less restrictive poll worker requirements can ease recruitment efforts. However, underlying demographics and income levels also help identify where recruitment may be difficult. He claims that the U.S. Election Assistance Commissions report on poll worker recruitment is incomplete, particularly for states formerly covered by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.