Latest Research from the VTP

Voting: What Has Changed, What Hasn't, & Why Research Bibliography

Working Paper No.: 
108
Date Published: 
01/09/2013
Author(s): 
R. Michael Alvarez, Caltech; Jonathan N. Katz, Caltech
Charles Stewart III, MIT; Ronald L. Rivest, MIT
Stephen Ansolabehere, Harvard; Thad E. Hall, University of Utah

Since the origins of the Caltech/MIT Voting Technology Project in the fall of 2000, there has been an explosion of research and analysis on election administration and voting technology.  As we worked throughout 2012 on our most recent study, Voting:  What Has Changed, What Hasn’t, & What Needs Improvement, we found many more research studies.  In this research bibliography, we present the research literature that we have found; future revisions of this research bibliography will update this list.

Voting Made Safe and Easy: The Impact of e-voting on Citizen Perceptions

Author(s): 
R. Michael Alvarez, Caltech
Ines Levin, University of Georgia
Julia Pomares, Center for Implementation of Public Policities Promoting Equity and Growth, Marcelo Leiras, Universidad de San Andres and Conicet
Journal: 
Political Science Research and Methods
pp: 
117-137
Link to Article: 
Date Published: 
06/12/2013

AbstractVoting technologies frame the voting experience. Different ways of presenting information to voters, registering voter choices and counting ballots may change the voting experience and cause individuals to re-evaluate the legitimacy of the electoral process. Yet few field experiments have evaluated how voting technologies affect the voting experience. This article uses unique data from a recent e-voting field experiment in Salta, Argentina to study these questions.

Voter Confidence In 2010: Voter Identification, perceptions of Fraud, Winning and Losing and the Voter Experience

Working Paper No.: 
103
Date Published: 
04/17/2011
Author(s): 
Lonna Rae Atkeson, University of New Mexico

Over the last decade, scholars of American politics have invested research time and effort into the study of election administration and election performance.

Voting Made Safe and Easy: The Impact of e-voting on Citizen Perceptions

Author(s): 
R. Michael Alvarez, Caltech
Ines Levin, University of Georgia
Julia Pomares, Center for Implementation of Public Policities Promoting Equity and Growth, Marcelo Leiras, Universidad de San Andres and Conicet
Journal: 
Political Science Research and Methods
pp: 
117-137
Link to Article: 
Date Published: 
06/12/2013

AbstractVoting technologies frame the voting experience. Different ways of presenting information to voters, registering voter choices and counting ballots may change the voting experience and cause individuals to re-evaluate the legitimacy of the electoral process. Yet few field experiments have evaluated how voting technologies affect the voting experience. This article uses unique data from a recent e-voting field experiment in Salta, Argentina to study these questions.

Measuring Election Performance

Working Paper No.: 
94
Date Published: 
12/11/2009
Author(s): 
R. Michael Alvarez
Caltech
Introduction The 2000 presidential election was one of the closest elections in American history. A margin of about 550,000 votes separated Al Gore from George Bush, only about 0.52% of votes cast. And despite the fact that Gore received more of the popular vote than Bush, after a contentious situation in Florida and a U.S. Supreme Court decision, Bush was the recipient of more Electoral College votes than Gore (271 to 266) and Bush became president.

Voting: What Has Changed, What Hasn't, & What Needs Improvement

Date Published: 
10/18/2012
Author(s): 
R. Michael Alvarez, Caltech; Jonathan N. Katz, Caltech
Charles Stewart III, MIT; Ronald L. Rivest, MIT
Stephen Ansolabehere, Harvard; Thad E. Hall, University of Utah

In this report, we examine how voting technologies and election administration in the United States have changed—or have not changed—since the controversial 2000 presidential election.

Waiting to Vote in 2012

Working Paper No.: 
110
Date Published: 
04/01/2013
Author(s): 
Charles Stewart III, MIT

Prepared for the conference on “The Voting Wars: Elections and the Law from Registration to Inauguration,” University of Virginia Law School, March 23, 2013, Charlottesville, Virginia.  This paper uses data from the 2008 and 2012 Survey of the Performance of American Elections, which was generously funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts, which bears no responsibility for the analysis found herein. Waiting in line to vote is one of the clichés of Election Day, whether the venue is Kenya or the United States.  The length of time waiting to vote has regularly been an issue in the voting wars of t

Pattern Matching Encryption, Strategic Equivalence of Range Voting and Approval Voting, and Statistical Robustness of Voting Rules

Working Paper No.: 
109
Date Published: 
02/13/2013
Author(s): 
Emily Shen, MIT

AbstractWe present new results in the areas of cryptography and voting systems.

Results and Implications: The June "Top-Two" Primary & California's 2012 Legislative Races

Working Paper No.: 
107
Date Published: 
11/02/2012
Author(s): 
J. Andrew Sinclair, Caltech

Executive Summary This report summarizes some basic results of California’s June 2012 “Top-Two” primary.  It focuses on legislative offices with multiple districts within the state:  California State Assembly, California State Senate, and United States House of Representatives.

Results and Implications: The June "Top-Two" Primary & California's 2012 Legislative Races

Working Paper No.: 
107
Date Published: 
11/02/2012
Author(s): 
J. Andrew Sinclair, Caltech

Executive Summary This report summarizes some basic results of California’s June 2012 “Top-Two” primary.  It focuses on legislative offices with multiple districts within the state:  California State Assembly, California State Senate, and United States House of Representatives.

Pages