Resources

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

186 Resources

Jenny Blessing, Julian Gomez, McCoy Patiño, Tran Nguyen2020
Voting by Mail Academic Papers

The research finds that online voter registration systems in some states have vulnerabilities that allow adversaries to alter or effectively prevent a voter's registration. The analysis additionally finds that ballot tracking systems raise serious privacy questions surrounding ease of access to voter data.

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.

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.

William McGuire, Benjamin Gonzalez O’Brien, Katherine E. Baird, Benjamin Corbett, Loren Collingwood2020
Voting by Mail Academic Papers

The research finds that drop boxes have a positive effect on voter turnout and that decreasing the distance to these boxes can lead to an increased likelihood of voting.

Robert M. Stein, Christopher Mann, Charles Stewart III, Zachary Birenbaum, Anson Fung, Jed Greenberg, Farhan Kawsar, Gayle Alberda, R. Michael Alvarez, Lonna Atkeson, Emily Beaulieu, Nathaniel A. Birkhead, Frederick J. Boehmke, Joshua Boston, Barry C. Burden, Francisco Cantu, Rachael Cobb, David Darmofal, Thomas C. Ellington, Terri Susan Fine, Charles J. Finocchiaro, Michael D. Gilbert, Victor Haynes, Brian Janssen, David Kimball, Charles Kromkowski, Elena Llaudet, Kenneth R. Mayer, Matthew R. Miles, David Miller, Lindsay Nielson, Yu Ouyang, Costas Panagopoulos, Andrew Reeves, Min Hee Seo, Haley Simmons, Corwin Smidt, Farrah M. Stone, Rachel VanSickle-Ward, Jennifer Nicoll Victor, Abby Wood, Julie Wronski2020
In-Person Voting Academic Papers

This paper examines factors contributing to wait times during the 2016 presidential election across multiple counties, finding that inadequate resources and staffing are key drivers of long lines.

Stephen Graves, Colin McIntyreStanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project2020
In-Person Voting Tools

This tool helps election officials understand how long it will take for lines to dissipate after predictable early-morning or late-day surges of voters at polling places. Calculates projected line lengths and wait times during these surge periods to support staffing and resource planning.

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

This tool helps election officials determine the capacity of a modified polling place system under various social distancing measures and identify where process bottlenecks may have shifted in response to those changes.

Daniel M. Thompson, Jennifer A. Wu, Jesse Yoder, Andrew B. Hall2020
Voting by Mail Academic Papers

Authors collect data from 1996-2018 on all three U.S. states who implemented universal vote-by-mail in a staggered fashion across counties, allowing us to use a difference-in-differences design at the county level to estimate causal effects. They find that: (1) universal vote-by-mail does not appear to affect either party's share of turnout; (2) universal vote-by-mail does not appear to increase either party's vote share; and (3) universal vote-by-mail modestly increases overall average turnout rates, in line with previous estimates.

Philip Kortum, Michael D. Byrne, Julie WhitmoreRice University2020
In-Person Voting Academic Papers

This paper proposes a two-part framework for evaluating ballot-marking device verification, finding that while most voters can detect errors when they check their ballot, most do not check their ballot in the first place.

The Council of State Governments, Overseas Voting Initiative2020
Voting by Mail Reports

Since the passage of the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment of 2009, many technology solutions have been developed to help UOCAVA voters request, receive and return their ballots. This report examines the preliminary and current landscape of these technology solutions and identifies barriers to ensuring their sustainability. The report also identifies areas of further research related to emerging UOCAVA balloting solutions.

Enrico CantoniUniversity of Bologna2020
In-Person Voting Academic Papers

In this paper, Cantoni Indicates that extending the distance to a polling place by a quarter mile decreases voter turnout by one to three percentage points, with a greater impact observed in areas with higher proportions of non-white voters.