Resources

Use our resource library to explore the latest research in the field of election science.

186 Resources

Lisa A. BryantCalifornia State University2020
In-Person Voting Academic Papers

This paper compares in-person versus absentee voting, finding that voters randomly assigned to in-person voting reported significantly higher levels of voter confidence than those assigned to absentee voting.

Yochai Benkler, Casey Tilton, Bruce Etling, Hal Roberts, Justin Clark, Robert Faris, Jonas Kaiser, Carolyn ScmittBerkman Klein Center2020
Voter Trust Reports

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.

Bridgett A. KingAuburn University2020
In-Person Voting Academic Papers

Using the Survey of the Performance of American Elections, authors find that wait times have a significant negative effect on voter confidence, as do challenges with voting equipment and voter registration irregularities.

Andrew W. Appel, Richard A. DeMillo, Philip B. StarkPrinceton University2020
In-Person Voting Academic Papers

In this paper, authors argue that ballot-marking devices cannot ensure that the paper ballot accurately reflects the voter's choices because voters rarely verify the printed ballot carefully enough to detect errors or manipulation.

Bridgett A. KingAuburn University2020
Voter Trust Academic Papers

Utilizing the 2008–2016 Survey on the Performance of American Elections (SPAE), the analysis finds that wait times have a negative effect on confidence as do challenges with the voting equipment and voter registration.

Charles Stewart IIIStanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project2020
In-Person Voting Tools

This tool can be used to estimate outside queue capacity needs, average voter wait times, and the number of voters who will wait too long, given social distancing constraints that limit the number of people allowed inside a polling place at one time.

Colin Jones, Robert M. Stein, Lonna Atkeson, M.V. Hood III, Mason ReeceMIT Election Data + Science Lab2020
Voter Trust Reports

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).

Hannah Klain, Kevin Morris, Max Feldman, Rebecca AyalaBrennan Center for Justice2020
In-Person Voting Reports

This report documents racial disparities in Election Day wait times, finding that voters in minority precincts face systematically longer waits than those in majority-white precincts.

In-Person Voting Tools

This tool provides eight key questions election officials should consider when designing or reviewing a ballot. These questions focus on layout, instructions, typography, and formatting to help minimize voter errors and undervoting.

R. Michael Alvarez, Jian Cao, Yimeng Li2020
Voter Trust Academic Papers

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

Juan GilbertStanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project2020
In-Person Voting Tools

This system allows poll workers to hand out tickets to voters waiting in line. Tickets are printed on demand and include a QR code with a date and time for the voter to return, available in English and Spanish. When voters return, the QR code is scanned, and they proceed to vote, reducing physical wait times.

Charles Stewart IIIMIT Election Data + Science Lab2020
Voter Trust Reports

This post-election survey reports on how Americans cast ballots in 2020 and how confident they were that votes were counted accurately.