Abstract
When election reforms such as Ranked Choice Voting or the Alternative Vote are proposed to replace plurality voting, they offer lengthier instructions, more opportunities for political expression, and more opportunities for mistakes on the ballot. Observational studies of voting error rely on ecological inference from geographically aggregated data. Here we use an experimental approach instead, to examine the effect of two different ballot conditions at the individual level of analysis: the input rules that the voter must use and the number of ballot options presented for the voter’s choice. This experiment randomly assigned three different input rules (single-mark, ranking, and grading) and two different candidate lists (with six and eight candidates) to over 6,000 online respondents in the USA, during the American presidential primary elections in 2020, simulating a single-winner presidential election. With more expressive input rules (ranking and grading), the distinction between minor mistakes and totally invalid votes—a distinction inapplicable to single‐mark ballots (1MB) voting—assumes new importance. Regression analysis indicates that more complicated input rules and more candidates on the ballot did not raise the probability that a voter would cast a void (uncountable) vote, despite raising the probability of at least one violation of voting instructions.
Highlights
When voters, activists, and politicians consider the mer‐ its and demerits of election reform, it is natural for them to consult previous experience
As cities and states around the country consider switching from plurality voting rules or two‐round systems to Ranked Choice Voting (RCV), for example, a plausible suspicion suggests that significant numbers of voters would in effect get counted out by making more mistakes on more complicated ballots
The analysis reported in this article is based on voting experiments conducted in four American states in March 2020
Summary
Activists, and politicians consider the mer‐ its and demerits of election reform, it is natural for them to consult previous experience They want to know about the past record of the status quo and of any proposed changes of electoral rules or pro‐ cedures. RCV and other ballot reforms are proposals for funda‐ mentally changing input rules, or the structure that the ballot imposes on how voters insert their judgments into the count. Another issue that may complicate voters’ task, and lead to more error, is the number of options on the ballot for any given contest.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
