Are elite cues necessary to drive the “Winner Effect” on trust in elections?

Reller, Cassidy; Anderson, Anthony; Kousser, Thad

doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2022.102541

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In particular, perceptions of electoral legitimacy tend to be much higher than perceptions of voter confidence. Finally, and consistent with the findings of Reller et al (2022), doubts about legitimacy emerge even when the losing candidate does not question the result.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

“…Testing the causal effect of elite cues is difficult using observational data, but it is possible to test whether cues are necessary by examining elections in which elite cues are absent. In a study that does just this, Reller et al (2022) study perceptions of electoral integrity before and after the 2021 gubernatorial recall election in California. They find supporters of the failed recall effort did become less trusting, even though the leading replacement candidate immediately conceded without crying fraud.…”

Section: Existing Legitimacy Measures Are Imprecisementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Third, while Republicans’ survey responses echo Trump's rhetoric, it is not clear if losers’ rhetoric is a necessary cause of voters’ rejection of legitimacy (Reller et al, 2022). To show such rhetoric is not necessary, we would want to observe how perceptions of legitimacy change among losing candidates when the losing candidate does not deny the legitimacy of the results.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Legitimate questions: Public perceptions of the legitimacy of US presidential election outcomes

Sances

2023

Research & Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous polls show most Republicans view the 2020 election as illegitimate, but we know relatively little about legitimacy perceptions among losing candidates’ supporters in past elections. I analyze 76 polls asking about the legitimacy of the 2000, 2016, and 2020 presidential elections. Even before 2020, the losing candidate’s supporters are much less likely to view the outcome as legitimate. Losers are about 60 percentage points less likely to accept the election in 2000, about 40 points less likely in 2016, and about 70 points less likely in 2020. Perceptions of legitimacy are typically higher than confidence in election results, and many voters express doubts about the vote count while still accepting the legitimacy of the result.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Section: Existing Legitimacy Measures Are Imprecisementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Legitimate questions: Public perceptions of the legitimacy of US presidential election outcomes

Sances

2023

Research & Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In our survey, they are similar in size to the gap between the levels of trust that Americans have in their own states' elections compared with other state's elections (see Figure 1). They are also similar in size to the "winner effect" estimated in Reller et al 2022, which found six to 15 percentage point shifts in trust after election results became clear. The fact that exposure to an informational video can bring effects on a scale approaching the impact of these factors points to the promise that a sustained public information campaign could hold for restoring confidence in American elections.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 75%

How Federalism Plus Polarization Create Distrust in American Elections (and Experimental Evidence for a Potential Solution)

Gaudette,

Hill,

Kousser

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Constitution grants states the power to manage elections, yet this poses formidable challenges in polarized and partisan state contexts. Despite non-partisan election officials using consistent methods for ballot protection nationwide, voters often rely on their knowledge of policy conflicts to gauge trust in other states' elections. Through a nationally representative survey, we find that trust in one's own state elections exceeds trust in those of other states. This gap is more pronounced for California and Texas, known for one-party ideological control. A survey experiment demonstrates that non-partisan messages from these states' officials can boost trust across state and party boundaries. Texas messaging enhances trust in Texas elections for Californians and Coloradans, while California messaging builds trust in California elections for Texans and Georgians. Strikingly, this trust boost occurs regardless of respondents' party affiliations, indicating that a robust public information campaign could mitigate polarized trust in election integrity across states.

show abstract

“…Evidence suggests that political elites have played a role in increasing mistrust by repeating unsubstantiated claims about voter fraud in messaging directed at their supporters (Beaulieu 2014, Berlinski et al 2021. Reller et al (2022) show that trust in elections can also shift at the mass level without any elite cues, finding that the partisans of the party who lose an election express reduced trust following the loss even when their preferred candidate does not make any claims of vote fraud. Notably, they find that election winners also see an immediate increase in trust once the results are revealed.…”

Section: Partisan Polarization and Trust In Electionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can Official Messaging on Trust in Elections Break Through Partisan Polarization?

Gaudette,

Hill,

Kousser

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Partisan actors in the United States have recently politicized trust in the administration of elections. In combination with inflexible partisan polarization, politicized election administration could undermine an essential condition of democracy: the peaceful transfer of power following elections. Can messaging about trust in elections break through partisan polarization? Partnering with election officials from Los Angeles County, Colorado, Georgia, and Texas, we used messaging experiments with nearly 8,500 Americans following the 2022 US midterm elections to measure the impact on trust. We find that state and local election officials can be strongly effective at increasing trust in their own state elections. Our pooled estimate suggests that one 30-second official message increases trust in local elections by about one-fifth of the pre-treatment difference between Democrats and Republicans. Additionally, videos explaining protections on election integrity in Arizona and Virginia increase trust in elections administered outside respondents’ own state. Our results suggest that election officials can break through partisan politics and play an important role in rebuilding trust in the democratic process.

show abstract

Are elite cues necessary to drive the “Winner Effect” on trust in elections?

Cited by 8 publications

References 13 publications

Legitimate questions: Public perceptions of the legitimacy of US presidential election outcomes

Legitimate questions: Public perceptions of the legitimacy of US presidential election outcomes

How Federalism Plus Polarization Create Distrust in American Elections (and Experimental Evidence for a Potential Solution)

Can Official Messaging on Trust in Elections Break Through Partisan Polarization?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About