Do (many) voters like ranking?

Blais, André; Plescia, Carolina; Högström, John; Péloquin-Skulski, Gabrielle

doi:10.1177/1354068820945156

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In studies specific to RCV, status quo bias has been evident. For example, in a survey experiment by Blais and others (2021), voters in Ireland, where RCV is used, liked RCV better than voters in the countries where it is not. In a 2020 survey experiment among U.S. voters, a large majority preferred the status quo option of plurality over RCV (Anthony et al, 2021).…”

Section: Previous Research About Rcv and Runoff Relevant To The Impac...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, there are scholarly concerns about the complexity of RCV (Blais et al, 2021; Neely & Cook, 2008, p. 531)—concerns that would be intensified in the case of CFBVs. Of course, relative to plurality or runoff elections, in which voters choose only one candidate and the candidate with the most votes wins (or the two candidates with the most votes win in a first round), RCV is complex; voters are asked to rank numerous candidates and there can be many rounds of vote tabulation and re‐tabulation.…”

Section: Previous Research About Rcv and Runoff Relevant To The Impac...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In other studies, however, the results were disappointing. In the only cross‐national study—a survey experiment fielded in European nations by Blais and others (2021)—respondents either ranked the three or five parties on the ballot in the hypothetical election or chose one party; respondents' satisfaction with these alternatives was similar. In a survey experiment in the United States by Nielson (2017) with many rankings, the results were negative.…”

Section: Previous Research About Rcv and Runoff Relevant To The Impac...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Come‐from‐behind victories under ranked‐choice voting and runoff: The impact on voter satisfaction

Cerrone

McClintock

2023

Politics & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Both ranked‐choice voting (RCV) and runoff seek to prevent the election of candidates with only minority support by enabling more broadly approved rivals to win through come‐from‐behind victories (CFBVs). Although CFBVs are intrinsic to RCV and runoff, they have received little scholarly attention. This study suggests that, amid voters' status quo bias, CFBVs provoke dissatisfaction. In a survey experiment fielded on U.S. voters, CFBVs under RCV significantly reduced satisfaction, while there was a weaker negative effect under runoff. Similarly, RCV was repealed or faced a visible repeal attempt in the vast majority of U.S. jurisdictions that experienced a CFBV in the first or second use of the rule. This was not the case for runoff. We encourage greater voter education, including regarding the rationale for and mechanics of CFBVs under RCV as well as consideration of runoff and other rules that encourage the election of candidates with majority support.Related ArticlesMcCarthy, Devin, and Jack Santucci. 2021. “Ranked Choice Voting as a Generational Issue in Modern American Politics.” Politics & Policy 49(1): 33–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12390.Nielson, Lindsay. 2017. “Ranked Choice Voting and Attitudes toward Democracy in the United States: Results from a Survey Experiment.” Politics & Policy 45(4): 535–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12212.Stiers, Dieter. 2019. “Static and Dynamic Models of Retrospective Voting: A Clarification and Application to the Individual Level.” Politics & Policy 47(5): 859–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12324.

show abstract

Section: Previous Research About Rcv and Runoff Relevant To The Impac...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Previous Research About Rcv and Runoff Relevant To The Impac...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Previous Research About Rcv and Runoff Relevant To The Impac...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Come‐from‐behind victories under ranked‐choice voting and runoff: The impact on voter satisfaction

Cerrone

McClintock

2023

Politics & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The expressive power of voting rules

Bourgeois-Gironde,

Ferreira

2023

Soc Choice Welf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Different voting rules are commonly used to settle collective decisions. A promising way to assess voting rules, for which little is known, is to compare the expressive utility that voters derive from voting with each rule. In this paper, we first propose a simple ordinal model of expressive voting that allows us to compare voting rules in terms of the expressive utility that voters can derive from voting (their expressive power). Our model provides a novel testable implication according to which expected turnout increases with expressive power. We then ran an online experiment testing this implication in a controlled environment. We find that if voters are made aware of alternative voting rules, turnout is higher in voting rules with higher expressive power. Our results also show that higher expressive power is associated with a better representation of voters’ actual preferences and, according to our model, higher expressive utility. This suggests that the expressive power of voting rules is a relevant criterion when choosing between voting rules for economic and political decisions.

show abstract

Do (many) voters like ranking?

Cited by 2 publications

References 25 publications

Come‐from‐behind victories under ranked‐choice voting and runoff: The impact on voter satisfaction

Come‐from‐behind victories under ranked‐choice voting and runoff: The impact on voter satisfaction

The expressive power of voting rules

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About