The participatory and partisan impacts of mandatory vote-by-mail.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Barber M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7449689 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:In response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many scholars and policy makers are urging the United States to expand voting-by-mail programs to safeguard the electoral process. What are the effects of vote-by-mail? In this paper, we provide a comprehensive design-based analysis of the effect of universal vote-by-mail-a policy under which every voter is mailed a ballot in advance of the election-on electoral outcomes. We collect data from 1996 to 2018 on all three US states that 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. We 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. All three conclusions support the conventional wisdom of election administration experts and contradict many popular claims in the media.
| S-EPMC7322007 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Are voters as polarized as political leaders when it comes to their preferences about how to cast their ballots in November 2020 and their policy positions on how elections should be run in light of the COVID-19 outbreak? Prior research has shown little party divide on voting by mail, with nearly equal percentages of voters in both parties choosing to vote this way where it is an option. Has a divide opened up this year in how voters aligned with the Democratic and Republican parties prefer to cast a ballot? We address these questions with two nationally diverse, online surveys fielded from April 8 to 10 and June 11 to 13, of 5,612 and 5,818 eligible voters, respectively, with an embedded experiment providing treated respondents with scientific projections about the COVID-19 outbreak. We find a nearly 10 percentage point difference between Democrats and Republicans in their preference for voting by mail in April, which had doubled in size to nearly 20 percentage points in June. This partisan gap is wider still for those exposed to scientific projections about the pandemic. We also find that support for national legislation requiring states to offer no-excuse absentee ballots has emerged as an increasingly polarized issue.
| S-EPMC7547252 | biostudies-literature
Project description:American voters are assigned to vote at a particular polling location (e.g., a church, school, etc.). We show these assigned polling locations can influence how people vote. Analysis of a recent general election demonstrates that people who were assigned to vote in schools were more likely to support a school funding initiative. This effect persisted even when controlling for voters' political views, demographics, and unobservable characteristics of individuals living near schools. A follow-up experiment using random assignment suggests that priming underlies these effects, and that they can occur outside of conscious awareness. These findings underscore the subtle power of situational context to shape important real-world decisions.
| S-EPMC2449328 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Recent studies have noted extensive inconsistencies in gene start sites among orthologous genes in related microbial genomes. Here we provide the first documented evidence that imposing gene start consistency improves the accuracy of gene start-site prediction. We applied an algorithm using a genome majority vote (GMV) scheme to increase the consistency of gene starts among orthologs. We used a set of validated Escherichia coli genes as a standard to quantify accuracy. Results showed that the GMV algorithm can correct hundreds of gene prediction errors in sets of five or ten genomes while introducing few errors. Using a conservative calculation, we project that GMV would resolve many inconsistencies and errors in publicly available microbial gene maps. Our simple and logical solution provides a notable advance toward accurate gene maps.
| S-EPMC3219611 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Elections, specially in countries such as Brazil, with an electorate of the order of 100 million people, yield large-scale data-sets embodying valuable information on the dynamics through which individuals influence each other and make choices. In this work we perform an extensive analysis of data sets available for Brazilian proportional elections of legislators and city councilors throughout the period 1970-2014, which embraces two distinct political regimes: a military regime followed by a democratic one. We perform a comparative analysis of elections for legislative positions, in different states and years, through the distribution p(v) of the number of candidates receiving v votes. We show the impact of the different political regimes on the vote distributions. Although p(v) has a common shape, with a scaling behavior, quantitative details change over time and from one electorate to another. In order to interpret the observed features, we propose a multi-species model consisting in a system of nonlinear differential equations, with values of the parameters that reflect the heterogeneity of candidates. In its simplest setting, the model can not explain the cutoff, formed by the most voted candidates, whose success is determined mainly by their peculiar, intrinsic characteristics, such as previous publicity. However, the modeling allows to interpret the scaling of p(v), yielding a predictor of the degree of feedback in the interactions of the electorate. Knowledge of the feedback is relevant beyond the context of elections, since a similar interactivity may occur for other social contagion processes in the same population.
| S-EPMC4587976 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A popular initiative in support of regulating future immigration to Switzerland was accepted by the electorate in 2014. Assuming that the initiative acted as an exclusionary threat for current immigrants of Switzerland, we conducted an online survey among a sample of highly-skilled German-speaking immigrants ("expats"). Participants reported having experienced negative affect following the vote. Moreover, having a more left-wing orientation, living in a political constituency that had voted pro-regulation and having proportionally few Swiss friends positively predicted negative affect following the vote. Negative affect was associated with a reported negative change in one's attitudes towards Switzerland, increased considerations to leave the country, and impaired satisfaction with life. In sum, the results suggest that a powerful exclusionary threat such as a national vote may be experienced as distressful by highly-skilled immigrants currently living in the country.
| S-EPMC5391132 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Organizational leaders and scholars have issued calls for the medical profession to refocus its efforts on fulfilling the core tenets of professionalism. A key element of professionalism is participation in community affairs. OBJECTIVE: To measure physician voting rates as an indicator of civic participation. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey of a subgroup of physicians from a nationally representative household survey of civilian, noninstitutionalized adult citizens. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 350,870 participants in the Current Population Survey (CPS) November Voter Supplement from 1996-2002, including 1,274 physicians and 1,886 lawyers; 414,989 participants in the CPS survey from 1976-1982, including 2,033 health professionals. MEASUREMENTS: Multivariate logistic regression models were used to compare adjusted physician voting rates in the 1996-2002 congressional and presidential elections with those of lawyers and the general population and to compare voting rates of health professionals in 1996-2002 with those in 1976-1992. RESULTS: After multivariate adjustment for characteristics known to be associated with voting rates, physicians were less likely to vote than the general population in 1998 (odds ratio 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-0.99), 2000 (odds ratio 0.64; 95% CI 0.44-0.93), and 2002 (odds ratio 0.62; 95% CI 0.48-0.80) but not 1996 (odds ratio 0.83; 95% CI 0.59-1.17). Lawyers voted at higher rates than the general population and doctors in all four elections (P < .001). The pooled adjusted odds ratio for physician voting across the four elections was 0.70 (CI 0.61-0.81). No substantial changes in voting rates for health professionals were observed between 1976-1982 and 1996-2002. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians have lower adjusted voting rates than lawyers and the general population, suggesting reduced civic participation.
| S-EPMC1852914 | biostudies-other
Project description:Since Downs proposed that the act of voting is irrational in 1957, myriad models have been proposed to explain voting and account for observed turnout patterns. We propose a model in which partisans consider both the instrumental and expressive benefits of their vote when deciding whether or not to abstain in an election, introducing an asymmetry that most other models do not consider. Allowing learning processes within our electorate, we analyze what evolutionarily stable strategies are rationalizable under various conditions. Upon varying electorate size, the partisan split of the electorate, and the degree to which an electorate takes underdog considerations into account in its payoff structure, we find that different equilibria arise. Our model predicts comparative statics that are consistent with voter behavior, specifically affirming a "size effect," in which turnout decreases as electorate size increases. Furthermore, relaxing some of our preliminary assumptions eliminates some of the discrepancies between the predictions of our model and empirical voter behavior. In particular, our work demonstrates that misperceptions about the partisan split of an electorate may account for high turnout behavior .Supplementary informationThe online version supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13235-021-00384-1.
| S-EPMC8542561 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Theories in favor of deliberative democracy are based on the premise that social information processing can improve group beliefs. While research on the "wisdom of crowds" has found that information exchange can increase belief accuracy on noncontroversial factual matters, theories of political polarization imply that groups will become more extreme-and less accurate-when beliefs are motivated by partisan political bias. A primary concern is that partisan biases are associated not only with more extreme beliefs, but also with a diminished response to social information. While bipartisan networks containing both Democrats and Republicans are expected to promote accurate belief formation, politically homogeneous networks are expected to amplify partisan bias and reduce belief accuracy. To test whether the wisdom of crowds is robust to partisan bias, we conducted two web-based experiments in which individuals answered factual questions known to elicit partisan bias before and after observing the estimates of peers in a politically homogeneous social network. In contrast to polarization theories, we found that social information exchange in homogeneous networks not only increased accuracy but also reduced polarization. Our results help generalize collective intelligence research to political domains.
| S-EPMC6561169 | biostudies-literature
Project description:What role do ideologically extreme media play in the polarization of society? Here we report results from a randomized longitudinal field experiment embedded in a nationally representative online panel survey (N = 1,037) in which participants were incentivized to change their browser default settings and social media following patterns, boosting the likelihood of encountering news with either a left-leaning (HuffPost) or right-leaning (Fox News) slant during the 2018 US midterm election campaign. Data on ≈ 19 million web visits by respondents indicate that resulting changes in news consumption persisted for at least 8 wk. Greater exposure to partisan news can cause immediate but short-lived increases in website visits and knowledge of recent events. After adjusting for multiple comparisons, however, we find little evidence of a direct impact on opinions or affect. Still, results from later survey waves suggest that both treatments produce a lasting and meaningful decrease in trust in the mainstream media up to 1 y later. Consistent with the minimal-effects tradition, direct consequences of online partisan media are limited, although our findings raise questions about the possibility of subtle, cumulative dynamics. The combination of experimentation and computational social science techniques illustrates a powerful approach for studying the long-term consequences of exposure to partisan news.
| S-EPMC8040813 | biostudies-literature