Search

Poll watchers play an increasingly visible role in American elections, yet there is little research into how their presence shapes beliefs about electoral integrity. On the one hand, poll watchers—like other election observers—may lead voters to be more trusting in elections. On the other hand, poll watchers who expressly represent political parties may contribute to polarized views of electoral integrity. We address this gap with two conjoint experiments and one vignette experiment administered on large national samples. The conjoint experiments vary several features of election polling locations, including the presence of poll watchers, voter identification requirements, and other election regulations. We find that regulations around poll watchers shape views of election fairness, but that the nature of this influence depends on the type and partisanship of poll watchers who are present. The vignette experiment shows that perceptions of poll watchers decline when these individuals act in bad faith; effects are especially large for Republican respondents. These findings help identify the potential that poll watchers have to shape Americans' beliefs about election fairness and integrity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Surveys are ubiquitous in the study of politics, making enumerator fabrication a critical issue. A prevailing view is that faked interviews affect inferences drawn from compromised datasets. Researchers have generated theories about how fabrication might affect inferences. Yet, speculation has outpaced systematic testing. We leverage a rare dataset to address this gap: a national face-to-face survey in Venezuela in which a uniquely high volume of falsified interviews was detected, canceled, and replaced. Comparing the verified and fraudulent datasets, we find that descriptive inference is sometimes affected, but correlational results hold, even in a dataset with an unusually high-fabrication rate. Enumerators largely fabricate plausible data. Though still egregious, enumerator fabrication may not constitute a grave threat to political science research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Democracy is in decline worldwide, primarily because voters elect candidates harboring antidemocratic aspirations. Scholars argue that elections animate the democratic spirits of winners and deflate those of losers, but what about contests ending in the victory of authoritarian candidates? To answer this question, we consider the dynamics of commitment to democracy in Brazil's 2018 presidential campaign. Drawing on AmericasBarometer data and an original five‐wave panel survey, we confirm that Jair Bolsonaro's campaign attracted skeptics of democracy. Although his election and inauguration boosted his supporters' allegiance to the political system, it also exacerbated their tolerance for institutional ruptures such as executive‐led coups. Meanwhile, election losers retained their democratic commitments. As a result, the authoritarian victory narrowed preexisting winner–loser gaps in support for the political system, but widened gaps in tolerance for certain antidemocratic maneuvers. Thus, authoritarian electoral victories can foster short‐term satisfaction among democracy's critics while abetting future instability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Retrospective vote choice is a critical question asked in political science surveys. Yet, this question suffers from persistently high item nonresponse rates, which can bias estimates and limit scholars' ability to make sound inferences. In this paper, we develop a sensitive survey technique to decrease nonresponse to the vote-choice question in a representative, face-to-face survey in Mexico City and Mexico State in 2018–2019. Respondents received different iterations of three treatments: an anonymity guarantee, a confidentiality reminder, and audio-assisted interviewing technology. The use of audio technology combined with a credible anonymity guarantee significantly improved item response. Both anonymity and confidentiality assurances improved the accuracy of response, which more closely resembled official results in the treatment conditions. We then evaluate two non-rival mechanisms that might drive our findings: beliefs about response anonymity and re-engagement with the survey. We find that increased perceptions of response anonymity are associated with improved item response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A key challenge facing many large, in-person public opinion surveys is ensuring that enumerators follow fieldwork protocols. Implementing "quality control" processes can improve data quality and help ensure the representativeness of the final sample. Yet while public opinion researchers have demonstrated the utility of quality control procedures such as audio capture and geo-tracking, there is little research assessing the relative merits of such tools. In this paper, we present new evidence on this question using data from the 2016/17 wave of the AmericasBarometer study. Results from a large classification task demonstrate that a small set of automated and human-coded variables, available across popular survey platforms, can recover the final sample of interviews that results when a full suite of quality control procedures is implemented. Taken as a whole, our results indicate that implementing and automating just a few of the many quality control procedures available can streamline survey researchers' quality control processes while substantially improving the quality of their data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Does citizen approval of vote buying depend on the type of benefit being offered? I answer this question using data from a survey experiment conducted on a nationally representative sample of Nicaraguans in 2017. Nicaraguans report significantly lower approval of money-for votes exchanges compared to goods-for-votes exchanges. Furthermore, reported rates of vote buying are lower in the money condition (4.8%) than in the goods-for-votes condition (7.8%), even though the posttreatment question assessing vote buying experience was identical across conditions. This study echoes other work suggesting the need for care in designing questions about vote buying, as slight changes in question wording that prime participants to think about goods versus monetary exchanges can affect both citizen approval of the behavior and the reported prevalence of vote buying. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]