A dashboard for new research on ranked-choice voting and other electoral reforms organized and supported by the Electoral Reform Research Group.
The Electoral Reform Research Group (ERRG) is a joint project of New America's Political Reform Program, the American Enterprise Institute, the Unite America Institute, and Stanford University’s Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law. Click here for a list of our partners and advisory board members.
The “Democratic vs. Republican” binary hides five distinct fights in U.S. politics. To find them, this report uses new methods to allow interest groups to speak for themselves.
By: Jesse M. Crosson, Alexander C. Furnas, Geoffrey M. Lorenz, and Kevin McAlister.
Read the brief here. For more on this research, the working paper is available here.
Leveraging data from nearly all U.S. cities that have used RCV since 2004, this study finds little evidence that RCV significantly improves the candidate pool in local elections.
By: Jonathan Colner
Read the brief here. For more on this research, the working paper is available here.
New models suggest that the single transferable vote, a proportional form of ranked-choice voting, is a powerful and reliable corrective for racial gerrymandering.
By: Gerdus Benadè, Ruth Buck, Moon Duchin, Dara Gold, and Thomas Weighill
Read and download the brief here. For more on this research, the working paper is available here.
A national survey experiment finds that explaining the vote transfer properties of RCV does not influence support for the rule, and that communicating that RCV promotes diversity increases preferences for RCV among Latino, Black, and AAPI, and white Democratic voters, but not among white Republicans.
By: Joseph Anthony, David C. Kimball, Jack Santucci, and Jamil Scott
Read the brief here. For more on this research, the working paper is available here.
Election results from 159 diverse cities in the U.S. and three other countries suggest larger assembly size and district magnitude are associated with more parties electing candidates of color.
By: Michael Latner, Jack Santucci, and Matthew S. Shugart
Read and download the brief here.
For more on this research, the working paper is available here.
Three experiments find broadly null effects in the relationship between messaging about ranked-choice voting and interest in running for political office.
By: Jack Santucci and Jamil Scott
Read the brief here. For more on this research, the working paper is available here.
A national survey experiment suggests most voters, but especially those who are older, Republican, and less educated, prefer the single vote to RCV.
By: Joseph Anthony and David C. Kimball
Read and download the brief here. For more on this research, the working paper is available here.
A large-scale behavioral experiment finds multiparty proportional and ranked-choice systems can offer the benefits of a small winner-loser gap and an absence of interparty animosity.
By: Sean Fischer, Amber Hye-Yon Lee, Yphtach Lelkes
Read and download the brief here. For more on this research, the working paper is available here.
Survey experiment finds extreme candidates are not viewed as more electable under ranked-choice voting compared to plurality voting.
By: Melissa Baker
Read and download the brief here. For more on this research, the working paper is available here.
Results from the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination contests that used RCV show voters used rankings to nominate the strongest general election candidate and improve representation of the diverse electorate at the national convention.
By: Baodong Liu, Nadia Mahallati, and Charles M. Turner
Read and download the brief here. For more on this research, the working paper is available here.
This study examines RCV’s effects on substantive representation in local politics and finds minimal effects on fiscal and ideological representation.
By: Arjun Vishwanath
Read and download the brief here. For more on this research, the working paper is available here.
This research shows that switching from first-past-the-post to ranked-choice voting does not reduce the degree of racially polarized voting.
By: Yuki Atsusaka and Theodore Landsman
Read and download the brief here. For more on this research, the working paper is available here.
This study finds candidates of color are significantly penalized in nonpartisan ranked-choice voting elections, but voters easily learn how RCV works.
By: Melody Crowder-Meyer, Shana Kushner Gadarian, and Jessica Trounstine
Read and download the brief here. For more on this research, the working paper is available here.
This experimental study of ranked-choice voting in local elections finds that large majorities of citizens take advantage of the greater opportunity for political expression that RCV rules provide, and disparities in expression among informed and uninformed voters can be overcome with voter guides.
By: Cheryl Boudreau, Jonathan Colner, Scott MacKenzie
Read and download the brief here. For more on this research, the working paper is available here.
This study finds Americans tend to favor the standard single vote, but views vary with age and experience with alternative voting systems.
By: André Blais, Carolina Plescia, and Semra Sevi
Read and download the brief here. For more on this research, the working paper is available here.
This study finds traditional, single-mark ballots can invite more error and rejection than alternative ballots types, including ranked-choice ballots.
By: Jason Maloy
Read and download the brief here. For more on this research, the working paper is available here.
In 2020, ranked-choice voting modestly encouraged openness to new candidates and ideological moderation—but its impact on voter satisfaction is more complex.
By: Joseph Cerrone and Cynthia McClintock
Read and download the brief here. For more on this research, the working paper is available here.