[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jexpos/v10y2023i3p413-425_9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

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

Suggested Citation

  • Biggers, Daniel R. & Elder, Elizabeth Mitchell & Hill, Seth J. & Kousser, Thad & Lenz, Gabriel S. & Lockhart, Mackenzie, 2023. "Can Addressing Integrity Concerns about Mail Balloting Increase Turnout? Results from a Large-Scale Field Experiment in the 2020 Presidential Election," Journal of Experimental Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(3), pages 413-425, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jexpos:v:10:y:2023:i:3:p:413-425_9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2052263022000318/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jexpos:v:10:y:2023:i:3:p:413-425_9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/xps .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.