View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Overvotes, Overranks, and Skips: Mismarked and Rejected Votes in Ranked Choice Voting.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Overvotes, Overranks, and Skips: Mismarked and Rejected Votes in Ranked Choice Voting.
Authors: Pettigrew, Stephen (AUTHOR), Radley, Dylan (AUTHOR)
Source: Political Behavior. Mar2026, Vol. 48 Issue 1, p229-251. 23p.
Subjects: Ballots, Voter turnout, Racial minorities, Educational attainment, Runoff elections, Income inequality
Abstract: Voters express their electoral preferences through their ballot. More states and local jurisdictions are adopting ranked choice voting (RCV), which affects how voter preferences are translated into electoral results by introducing a more complex ranked ballot and accompanying tabulation process. This research provides empirical estimates of rates of improper marking and vote rejection, and compares them to those rates on non-ranked offices (particularly single-mark, 'choose-one-candidate' offices). We describe a new, general typology for categorizing the ways voters can improperly mark a ranked ballot. We apply this typology to a database of ranked choice ballots that includes 3 million cast vote records representing over three-quarters of all Americans living in a jurisdiction that uses RCV. The data show that in a typical ranked choice race, nearly 1 in 20 (4.8%) voters improperly mark their ballot in at least one way. We argue that these improper marks are consistent with voter confusion about their ranked ballot, and find evidence that this mismarking rate is higher in areas with more racial minorities, lower-income households, and lower levels of educational attainment. We further find that votes in ranked choice races are about 10 times more likely to be rejected due to an improper mark than votes in non-ranked choice races. These findings raise key questions about voter participation and representation in ranked choice systems and have important policy implications for jurisdictions that already have or are considering adopting ranked choice voting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Political Behavior is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
Text:
  Availability: 1
Header DbId: pbh
DbLabel: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
An: 191573858
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Overvotes, Overranks, and Skips: Mismarked and Rejected Votes in Ranked Choice Voting.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Pettigrew%2C+Stephen%22">Pettigrew, Stephen</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Radley%2C+Dylan%22">Radley, Dylan</searchLink> (AUTHOR)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Political+Behavior%22">Political Behavior</searchLink>. Mar2026, Vol. 48 Issue 1, p229-251. 23p.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subjects
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Ballots%22">Ballots</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Voter+turnout%22">Voter turnout</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Racial+minorities%22">Racial minorities</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+attainment%22">Educational attainment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Runoff+elections%22">Runoff elections</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Income+inequality%22">Income inequality</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Voters express their electoral preferences through their ballot. More states and local jurisdictions are adopting ranked choice voting (RCV), which affects how voter preferences are translated into electoral results by introducing a more complex ranked ballot and accompanying tabulation process. This research provides empirical estimates of rates of improper marking and vote rejection, and compares them to those rates on non-ranked offices (particularly single-mark, 'choose-one-candidate' offices). We describe a new, general typology for categorizing the ways voters can improperly mark a ranked ballot. We apply this typology to a database of ranked choice ballots that includes 3 million cast vote records representing over three-quarters of all Americans living in a jurisdiction that uses RCV. The data show that in a typical ranked choice race, nearly 1 in 20 (4.8%) voters improperly mark their ballot in at least one way. We argue that these improper marks are consistent with voter confusion about their ranked ballot, and find evidence that this mismarking rate is higher in areas with more racial minorities, lower-income households, and lower levels of educational attainment. We further find that votes in ranked choice races are about 10 times more likely to be rejected due to an improper mark than votes in non-ranked choice races. These findings raise key questions about voter participation and representation in ranked choice systems and have important policy implications for jurisdictions that already have or are considering adopting ranked choice voting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of Political Behavior is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=pbh&AN=191573858
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1007/s11109-025-10028-4
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 23
        StartPage: 229
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Ballots
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Voter turnout
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Racial minorities
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational attainment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Runoff elections
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Income inequality
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Overvotes, Overranks, and Skips: Mismarked and Rejected Votes in Ranked Choice Voting.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Pettigrew, Stephen
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Radley, Dylan
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 03
              Text: Mar2026
              Type: published
              Y: 2026
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 01909320
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 48
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Political Behavior
              Type: main
ResultId 1