Can Addressing Integrity Concerns about Mail Balloting Increase Turnout? Results from a Large-Scale Field Experiment in the 2020 Presidential Election

IF 3.2 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Journal of Experimental Political Science Pub Date : 2022-11-24 DOI:10.1017/XPS.2022.31

Daniel R. Biggers, Elizabeth Mitchell Elder, Seth J. Hill, Thad Kousser, Gabriel S. Lenz, Mackenzie Lockhart

{"title":"Can Addressing Integrity Concerns about Mail Balloting Increase Turnout? Results from a Large-Scale Field Experiment in the 2020 Presidential Election","authors":"Daniel R. Biggers, Elizabeth Mitchell Elder, Seth J. Hill, Thad Kousser, Gabriel S. Lenz, Mackenzie Lockhart","doi":"10.1017/XPS.2022.31","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The 2020 presidential election brought expanded vote-by-mail opportunities, a rise in attacks on this process’s integrity, and the implementation of novel programs such as California’s Where’s My Ballot? system to ensure confidence in mail balloting. Can heightening awareness of this ballot-tracking system and other election protections alleviate fraud concerns and raise turnout? We assess whether messages reinforcing election integrity increased participation in the 2020 election through a large-scale voter mobilization field experiment. California registrants were mailed a letter that described either existing safeguards to prevent vote-by-mail fraud or the ability to track one’s ballot and ensure that it was counted. Analysis of state voter records reveals that neither message increased turnout over a simple election reminder or even no contact, even among subgroups where larger effects might be expected. In the context of a high-profile, high-turnout presidential election, assurances about ballot and electoral integrity did not increase turnout.","PeriodicalId":37558,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Political Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/XPS.2022.31","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The 2020 presidential election brought expanded vote-by-mail opportunities, a rise in attacks on this process’s integrity, and the implementation of novel programs such as California’s Where’s My Ballot? system to ensure confidence in mail balloting. Can heightening awareness of this ballot-tracking system and other election protections alleviate fraud concerns and raise turnout? We assess whether messages reinforcing election integrity increased participation in the 2020 election through a large-scale voter mobilization field experiment. California registrants were mailed a letter that described either existing safeguards to prevent vote-by-mail fraud or the ability to track one’s ballot and ensure that it was counted. Analysis of state voter records reveals that neither message increased turnout over a simple election reminder or even no contact, even among subgroups where larger effects might be expected. In the context of a high-profile, high-turnout presidential election, assurances about ballot and electoral integrity did not increase turnout.

查看原文本刊更多论文

解决邮件投票的诚信问题能否提高投票率？2020年总统选举的大规模实地实验结果

摘要2020年的总统选举扩大了邮寄投票的机会，对这一过程完整性的攻击增加，并实施了加利福尼亚州的“我的选票在哪里？”？确保邮寄投票信心的系统。提高对这种选票跟踪系统和其他选举保护措施的认识能缓解人们对舞弊的担忧并提高投票率吗？我们通过大规模的选民动员实地实验，评估加强选举诚信的信息是否增加了对2020年选举的参与。加利福尼亚州的登记者收到了一封信，信中描述了防止邮寄投票欺诈的现有保障措施，或者跟踪选票并确保其被计算在内的能力。对州选民记录的分析显示，这两条信息都没有通过简单的选举提醒甚至没有联系来增加投票率，即使在可能产生更大影响的亚群体中也是如此。在高调、高投票率的总统选举背景下，对选票和选举完整性的保证并没有增加投票率。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Experimental Political Science Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science

CiteScore

5.10

自引率

8.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Journal of Experimental Political Science (JEPS) features cutting-edge research that utilizes experimental methods or experimental reasoning based on naturally occurring data. We define experimental methods broadly: research featuring random (or quasi-random) assignment of subjects to different treatments in an effort to isolate causal relationships in the sphere of politics. JEPS embraces all of the different types of experiments carried out as part of political science research, including survey experiments, laboratory experiments, field experiments, lab experiments in the field, natural and neurological experiments. We invite authors to submit concise articles (around 4000 words or fewer) that immediately address the subject of the research. We do not require lengthy explanations regarding and justifications of the experimental method. Nor do we expect extensive literature reviews of pros and cons of the methodological approaches involved in the experiment unless the goal of the article is to explore these methodological issues. We expect readers to be familiar with experimental methods and therefore to not need pages of literature reviews to be convinced that experimental methods are a legitimate methodological approach. We will consider longer articles in rare, but appropriate cases, as in the following examples: when a new experimental method or approach is being introduced and discussed or when novel theoretical results are being evaluated through experimentation. Finally, we strongly encourage authors to submit manuscripts that showcase informative null findings or inconsistent results from well-designed, executed, and analyzed experiments.