Resources

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

186 Resources

Jesse ClarkMIT Election Data + Science Lab2019
Voter Trust Academic Papers

This paper, focusing on Colorado and Washington, finds that the implementation of vote by mail causes a significant decrease in voter confidence in both states. However, this decrease appears to be temporary, disappearing after only single election cycle.

Jeronimo Cortina, Brandon RottinghausUniversity of Houston2019
In-Person Voting Academic Papers

This paper analyzes how vote centers influence voter turnout in various election types in Texas, showing that their effect depends on the election context and voter demographics.

Conor M. Dowling, David Doherty, Seth J. Hill, Alan S. Gerber, Gregory A. Huber2019
In-Person Voting Academic Papers

This paper finds that large numbers of voters do not perceive their ballots as secret and harbor doubts about the institution's ability to keep them private, with perceptions varying by voting method and polling place design.

Nicholas D. BernardoUniversity of Rhode Island2019
In-Person Voting Academic Papers

In this MS thesis, Bernardo investigates how ballot-length metrics (words, questions, selections, pages, sheets, bilingual status) affect voting errors during the 2018 Rhode Island midterm election. He uses logistic regression models that control for municipal- and precinct-level demographics to analyze machine-based, human-machine interaction, and ballot-marking errors. Bernardo finds that longer ballots and urban precincts significantly increase the odds of voting errors, with implications for ballot design and jurisdiction-level oversight.

Holly Ann Garnett, Pam SimpsonMIT Election Data + Science Lab2019
Voter Trust Reports

This explainer reviews public attitudes toward voting machines, ballot-marking devices, paper records, and related election technologies and describes how confidence depends not only on actual system security but also on whether voters understand the safeguards protecting registration, voting, and counting.

MIT Election Data + Science Lab2018
Voter Trust Reports

This post-election survey reports on how Americans cast ballots in 2018 and how confident they were that votes were counted accurately.

Center for Inclusive Democracy2018
In-Person Voting Tools

The Voting Location and Outreach Tool is a publicly available tool that allows users to visualize data on the number, location, and historical use of Election Day vote centers and polling places, and to project equitable distributions of locations for upcoming elections.

Mirya R. Holman, J. Celeste Lay2018
Voter Trust Academic Papers

This paper examines whether correcting information can overcome misperceptions about election fraud. It finds that providing counter information is generally ineffective at remedying misperceptions and can, depending on the source, increase endorsements of misperceptions among Republicans.

Natalie Adona, Paul Gronke2018
In-Person Voting Reports

This report surveys the public's views on election administration and reform, examining what voters value most in the voting experience and which changes they believe would improve it.

Adriano Udani, David C. Kimball, Brian Fogarty2018
Voter Trust Academic Papers

This paper finds that media coverage of voter fraud is associated with public beliefs about voter fraud. In states where fraud was more frequently featured in local media outlets, public concerns about voter fraud were heightened. In particular, the paper finds that press attention to voter fraud has a larger influence on Republicans than Democrats and Independents.

Jacob Jaffe, Charles Stewart III, Jacob CoblentzCaltech-MIT Voting Technology Project2018
In-Person Voting Academic Papers

In this paper, authors develop models to estimate voter service times from voting machine log data, providing election officials with a scalable approach to analyze and improve polling place operations.

Betsy Sinclair, Steven S. Smith, Patrick D. Tucker2018
Voter Trust Academic Papers

This paper finds that the "winner" effect mitigates the effects from strong pre-election cues from elites. It also shows the effect of pre-election attention to the rigging issue.