Resources

This research finds that when automatic voter registration (AVR) is endorsed by Democratic leaders, Republicans (and independents) expect AVR to reduce the fairness and legitimacy of elections, while Democrats are generally resistant to partisan cues.

This paper focuses on Orange County (CA), using a survey of voters that was implemented immediately after the November 2018 midterm elections. Results show that voters who cast mail ballots are less confident about their own votes being counted correctly than in-person voters

In this article, using data from Orange County, California, the researchers develop two methods for evaluating the quality of voter registration data as it changes over time: (a) generating audit data by repeated record linkage across periodic snapshots of a given database and monitoring it for sudden anomalous changes and (b) identifying duplicates via an efficient, automated duplicate detection, and tracking new duplicates and deduplication efforts over time.

This research summary addresses how mail voting, absentee-ballot procedures, or claims about mail-ballot fraud affect voter confidence and perceived legitimacy. It is relevant because beliefs about fraud and exposure to misleading claims are central mechanisms through which confidence in election outcomes rises or falls. For this dataset, it helps explain why the 2020 election became a turning point in public debates over fraud, mail voting, certification, and legitimacy.

This study uses an experiment to examine how voting method impacts voter confidence. Voters were randomly assigned to either an in-person or absentee voting condition. Participants assigned to the absentee condition expressed lower levels of confidence that their votes would be counted correctly than those assigned to the in-person voting condition

This study investigates the reliability of Florida’s voter registration files through a phone survey, asking respondents to verify their records. Authors find 17.7% of registrants fail to verify at least one identifying piece of information.

This research develops and applies a method to estimate how many people voted twice in the 2012 presidential election. It estimates that about one in 4,000 voters cast two ballots, although an audit suggests that the true rate may be lower due to small errors in electronic vote records.

This report / guidance examines election results communication in relation to the entry’s stated focus on election results; delays; public communication. It is relevant because trusted, timely, and nonpartisan communication is one of the main tools election officials and civic groups use to counter distrust.

This research argues that local challenges remain when maintaining voters’ registration and voting history information, which undermines the quality of voter lists and the integrity of the electoral process. It analyzes Mississippi’s Statewide Election Management System (SEMS) records and finds that voter registration and voting history errors are linked to the county’s active and inactive registered voter rates and demographic characteristics.

This report finds that the disinformation campaign surrounding the risk of voter fraud associated with mail-in ballots follows an elite-driven, mass media model.

This analysis focuses on whether counties that had previously been “covered” purged voters at a higher rate than noncovered counties after the coverage formula was struck down. It finds increases in purge rate of between 1.5 and 4.5 points in formerly covered jurisdictions post-Shelby, compared with counties that had not been subject to preclearance. Most of the increase came immediately, as the effect in 2014 is substantively and significantly higher than that in 2016.

There is increasing evidence that voters’ confidence in the outcome of elections, and more specifically, that their vote was counted accurately, is dominated by the whether the voter supported the winning or losing candidate in an election. Authors ask whether this winner (loser) effect is consistent over time and parties. Additionally, they test whether the strength of this effect on voter confidence varies across electoral level (i.e., confidence in a county, state, and nations vote counting).