Research

Research Recognitions

Tom Carsey Scholar Grant, State Politics and Policy Section, American Political Science Association, 2022
Dare to Discover Researcher, University of Iowa, Spring 2021
Tom Carsey Scholar Grant, State Politics and Policy Section, American Political Science Association, 2019

Forthcoming Books

[1] Coll, Joseph A., and Joseph Anthony. Lessons Learned from the 2020 Presidential Election: The Patterns and Election Consequences of How States Responded to the COVID-19 Pandemic. Palgrave Macmillan. Forthcoming.

This edited volume brings together leading scholars in the election science field to contribute to our understanding of the changes made to election access and election administration in the lead up to the 2020 election, why those changes occurred, and the effects of those changes. Reviewers of the manuscript suggested the book "will stimulate data collection on similar topics for years" and "have a long shelf life (decades for some scholars)", signifying the importance of this edited volume.

Forthcoming Book Chapters

[3] Coll, Joseph A. Partisanship, Fraud Beliefs, and the Costs of Voting. In Lessons Learned from the 2020 Presidential Election: The Patterns and Election Consequences of How States Responded to the COVID-19 Pandemic, eds. Joseph A. Coll and Joseph Anthony. Forthcoming.

Summary: This chapter examines how changes to election access during the 2020 election affected voter confidence and whether these effects differ by partisanship.

[2] Coll, Joseph A. The Tradeoff Between Protecting Voters and Ensuring Access for In-Person Voters During the COVID-19 Pandemic. In Lessons Learned from the 2020 Presidential Election: The Patterns and Election Consequences of How States Responded to the COVID-19 Pandemic, eds. Joseph A. Coll and Joseph Anthony. Forthcoming

Summary: This chapter examines how COVID-19 policies shaped voter access and evaluations during the 2020 election, arguing that these policies represent a tradeoff between protecting voters and ensuring positive experiences, on the one hand, and voter access on the other.

[1] Coll, Joseph A., Michael Ritter, and Caroline Tolbert. Campaigns, Elections, and Voter Access. In Politics in the American States Twelfth Edition, eds. Kousser, Michener, and Tolbert. Sage: CQ Press. Forthcoming.

Summary: This chapter in the often used Politics in the American States textbook provides a review of classic and recent literature regarding parties, campaigns, elections, and voter access, as well as discusses ongoing controversies within these topics.

Published and Forthcoming Articles

[10] Ritter, Michael, Joseph A. Coll, and Caroline Tolbert. Two Sides of the Same Coin? Election Administration, Electoral Laws, and Voter Turnout, Forthcoming at Election Law Journal

Abstract: According to the Brennan Center for Justice (2021), state legislatures in 47 states are considering 361 bills with voting restriction provisions since the 2020 presidential election. At the same time, many states have passed laws making voting more accessible during this time. Undergirding the operation of these laws are a holistic set of rules, procedures, technologies, and state and local election officials that shape the voting process across the United States (Alvarez, Atkeson, and Hall 2013, 31). Despite significant evidence documenting election administration matters, to date, little work has investigated the combined impact of state election laws and election administration side by side. Thus policy makers do not know which matters more in or how these factors interact to influence voting behavior. This study examines the independent, cumulative/additive, and interrelated effects of election administration and electoral reforms on voter turnout. Using an index of election administration (Election Performance Index, MIT 2020) to capture the performance of state level election administration and an index of election law reforms (Cost of Voting Index, Li, Pomante II, Schraufnagel 2018) to measure the ease of voting access merged with large sample voter surveys (Current Population Survey, Cooperative Congressional Election Study) and state level election results (McDonald 2020), the results find that greater election administration performance increases voter turnout by 3.8-6.5 percentage points, while more restrictive state voting laws deter voting by 3.9-7.5 points. Together, poor administration and high costs to vote can reduce the probability of an individual voting by 14 percentage points. At the same time, no interactive effects of administration and access were uncovered. The evidence indicates that state election administration and election laws are two distinct and yet interrelated sides of the coin of a state’s electoral system. This study recommends scholars include both measures in their models.

[9] Coll, Joseph A. Voter Identification Requirements, Collective Descriptive Representation, and Black and Latino Voter Turnout. Forthcoming at Politics, Groups, and Identities

Abstract: Previous evidence on the racial and ethnic effects of voter identification (ID) requirements is mixed; some works find voter IDs decrease Black and Latino turnout, others find no effect, and some conclude they may increase non-white turnout. Though these findings seem contradictory, this study argues all are plausible under the right conditions, specifically, the (lack of) racial/ethnic collective descriptive representation (CDR). CDR, or the extent to which an individual is represented by multiple members of their racial or ethnic group in office, may mediate the impact of voter ID requirements by providing substrative and symbolic benefits that outweigh costs of obtaining IDs, and by providing ID information and social pressure through mobilization efforts. As such, it is likely that the discriminatory effects of voter IDs differs based on the extent to which voters are descriptively represented. Using seven years of voter surveys (2006-2018; N=59K Black, 54K Latino) and a representative sample of national voter roll data (2012; N=343K Black, 279k Latino), this study shows that voter IDs deter Black voter turnout in low CDR states, but this discrepancy disappears in high CDR states. However, little evidence of significant effect for Latino voters is found.

[8] Coll, Joseph A., Caroline J. Tolbert, and Michael Ritter. Understanding Preferences for Comprehensive Electoral Reform. Social Science Quarterly, 103, no. 7 (2022): 1523-1538. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ssqu.13220

Abstract: The last decade has seen a decrease in American’s satisfaction with government and the democratic process, leading two-thirds of Americans to say ‘significant changes’ are needed in the design and structure of US democracy. At the same time, politicians and pundits frequently tie electoral reforms to political party success, increasing the salience and (perceived) electoral importance of these laws. Early work found most convenience voting reforms had mixed support with less than majority favorability nationwide. More recent work shows public attitudes about election reform, even low visibility laws, are strongly conditioned by partisanship. Using jackknifing resampling methods and a 2020 national survey this study develops an index of election reform policy mood. With one exception, every reform received majority support with 3 in 4 favoring early voting and no-excuse absentee ballots. Multivariate results find the effect of partisanship is conditioned by whether the respondent feels they generally win or lose in elections and satisfaction with democracy. Independents who are electoral losers or dissatisfied with government strongly favor election reform and resemble Democrats, while independents who feel they regularly win or are more satisfied are more opposed and resemble Republicans. The results find national policy mood for broad structural reform of US elections is high

[7] Coll, Joseph A. Proper Protective (Voting) Equipment: How Covid-19 Safety Measures Shaped In-Person Voting Experiences During the 2020 Election. American Politics Research 50, no. 6 (2022): 798-810. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X221112396

Abstract: Leading up to the 2020 election, many Americans were worried about casting a ballot in-person due to the Covid-19 pandemic and supported measures to protect voters at the voting booths. Addressing these concerns, election administrators enacted multiple Covid safety measures (e.g., routinely cleaning voting booths, wearing face masks, and providing single use ballot pens). Given voters’ health concerns related to the pandemic and support for safety measures at the ballot box, the presence of Covid safety protocols may increase how safe voters feel voting in-person and evaluations of their voting experience. Using the 2020 Survey of the Performance of American Elections, this study finds that the presence of Covid safety measures increased feelings of voting safety, evaluations of poll workers, and the positivity of the voting experience, but typically not polling place evaluations; though, effects differ by Covid safety policy.

[6] Coll, Joseph A. “The Determinants of Local Election Resource Distribution Nationwide” Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy 21, no. 3 (2022): 187-199 https://doi.org/10.1089/elj.2021.0035

Abstract: Election administration resources like polling places and workers are integral to the voting process. Though scholars have learned much about the effects of election administration on outcomes such as voter turnout or confidence in elections, less is known about what determines the distribution of election administration resources in the first place. Previous studies have suggested a number of explanations for how election resources are distributed, including as a service to constituents, out of racial bias, due to administrative capacity and demand, and through partisan lenses. However, evidence in support of these theories tend to come from only a handful of counties or states and, potentially as a result, is mixed. As such, current literature does not speak well to how elections are administered in the United States as much as how they are administered in specific states or counties. Using the density of early voting and Election Day polling places and workers (number of places or workers per 1,000 voting age people) from 2012-2018, this study examines several explanations for what drives election administration resource distribution nationwide. Results suggest that administrative demand (e.g., voting age population size) is the most influential factor. Evidence also suggests that partisanship plays a role, but whether partisan effects reflect partisan preferences for election administration or to increase co-partisan turnout is unclear. Conflicting results are found regarding the constituent service hypothesis, while evidence is found suggesting a lack of racial bias. These results suggest that, nationally, election administration resources are distributed to places where they are needed, but that partisan lenses may partially shape that distribution while racial biases may be artifacts of specific localities.

[5]Coll, Joseph A. and Courtney L. Juelich. “Expansive and Restrictive Electoral Environments and Their Differential Effects on Young Racial and Ethnic Voting Behavior” Journal of Race, Ethnicity, and Politics 7 (2022): 544-547. https://doi.org/10.1017/rep.2022.5

Abstract: Previous research on the voting propensity of young Americans has largely treated the effects of state electoral laws as homogenous, despite today’s youth belonging to the most racially and ethnically diverse age cohort to date. Research has documented differences in participatory resources across racial, ethnic, and age groups, with recent work also suggesting differences in racial and ethnic identity influences across age groups. These factors may lead to significant differences in voter turnout under different state electoral environments. Using the Current Population Survey (2000–2016), national voter rolls (2012), and the Cost of Voting Index, this study investigates how the intersectionality of age and racial/ethnic identification affect voting decisions across state electoral environments. Whether comparing young voters across racial/ethnic identifications or comparing young voters to their older racial/ethnic counterparts, results strongly support the assertion that young voters are affected to differing degrees by increased costs to vote along racial/ethnic lines.

[4] Coll, Joseph A. “Waiting to Vote Safely: Balancing Voter Safety and Voter Access in a Health Pandemic” Social Science Quarterly (2022): 380-398. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13124

Abstract: Objective: The aim of this article is to assess the impact of Covid-19 safety measures on voter wait times during the 2020U.S. election. Methods: Multinomial logistic regression models predicting voter wait times contingent on the presence of Covid safety measures: poll workers wearing face coverings, protective barriers separating voters and workers, voters and booths socially distanced, hand sanitizer, single-use ballot marking pens, and cleaning voting booths between voters, as well as an additive index of these measures. Results: Findings suggest Covid-safety measures significantly affected voter wait times. Effects vary by Covid safety feature, with face coverings, barriers, social distancing, and cleaning booths increasing voter wait times (typically around 10–30 min), single-use pens decreasing voter wait times, and hand sanitizer having no effect. Results are further confirmed using an additive index. Conclusion: Covid safety features likely increased voter wait times during the 2020 U.S. election, potentially accounting for a portion of the increased voter wait time, compared to previous elections

[3] Coll, Joseph A. "Demographic Disparities Using Ranked-Choice Voting? Ranking Difficulty, Under-Voting, and the 2020 Democratic Primary." Politics and Governance 9, no. 2 (2021): 293-305. https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v9i2.3913

Abstract: Ranked choice voting (RCV) has become increasingly popular in recent years, as more jurisdictions in the US adopt the voting system for local, state, and federal elections. Though previous studies have found potential benefits of RCV, some evidence suggests ranking multiple candidates instead of choosing one most preferred candidate may be difficult, with potential demographic disparities linked to age, gender, or racial or ethnic identity. Further, these difficulties have been assumed to cause individuals to improperly fill out RCV ballots, such as ranking too many or not enough candidates. This study seeks to answer three interrelated questions: 1) Which demographic groups find it difficult to rank candidates in RCV elections? 2) Who is more likely to cast under-voted ballots (not ranking all candidates)? 3) Is there a relationship between finding RCV voting difficult and the likelihood of casting an under-voted ballot? Using unique national survey data of 2020 Democratic primary candidate preferences, the results indicate most respondents find ranking candidates easy, but older, less interested, and more ideologically conservative individuals find it more difficult. In a hypothetical ranking of primary candidates, 12% of respondents under-voted (did not rank all options). Despite their perceived increased difficulty, older individuals were less likely to under-vote their ballot. No other demographic groups consistently experienced systematic differences in ranking difficulty or under-voting across a series of model specifications. These findings support previous evidence of older voters having increased difficulty, but challenge research assuming difficulty leads to under-voting, and that racial and ethnic groups are disadvantaged by RCV.

[2] Juelich, Courtney L., and Joseph A. Coll. "Ranked Choice Voting and Youth Voter Turnout: The Roles of Campaign Civility and Candidate Contact." Politics and Governance 9, no. 2 (2021): 319-331. https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v9i2.3914

Abstract: Ranked choice voting (RCV) has become increasing popular in the United States as more cities and states begin allowing voters to rank candidates in order of preference. This change in election system has been linked to increased campaign civility and mobilization, but with little evidence suggesting these benefits lead to increased voter turnout in the general population. This study argues that RCV elections may not increase overall voting but will increase youth voting. Considering young Americans, who have become increasingly pessimistic towards politics and are also heavily reliant on mobilization for participation, this study argues that increased campaign civility and mobilization may work to offset the negative feelings and lack of political engagement that plague young Americans. Using a matched study of individual level voter turnout for seven RCV and fourteen non-RCV local elections from 2013 and 2014, we find that there is no statistical difference in voting rates between RCV and plurality cities for the general public. Yet, in line with our hypotheses, younger voters are more likely to vote in RCV cities. Further, we find that increased contact in RCV elections accounts for a larger portion of the increased voter turnout compared to perceptions of campaign civility. Findings suggest RCV acts as a positive mobilizing force for youth voting through increasing campaign contact.

[1] Juelich, Courtney L., and Joseph A. Coll. "Rock the Vote or Block the Vote? How the Cost of Voting Affects the Voting Behavior of American Youth." American Politics Research 48, no. 6 (2020): 719-724. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X20920265

Abstract: Young voters make up the largest portion of the electorate but vote at the lowest rates of any age group. While scholars have studied how culture affects youth political participation, few studies have analyzed how institutional barriers affect youth voting—even though these laws have been found to affect turnout of other disadvantaged groups. Considering younger citizens are more likely to be non-habitual voters with less political knowledge, efficacy, and resources, it is possible that these laws have magnified effects for youths. This could explain why new voters, facing new restrictions to voting, are participating at lower percentages than youths of earlier cohorts. Using the 2004–2016 Current Population Survey (N = 360,000) and the Cost of Voting Index to test the effects of restrictive electoral environments on youth turnout, we find that restrictive environments disproportionately hurt young voters by decreasing the probability they turn out by 16 percentage points, compared with older voters

Works Under Review/Revise and Resubmit

Racial Stereotypes and the Unqualified Voter: Anti-Black Attitudes and Support for Voter Qualifications (w. R. Torres and C. Tolbert)

Abstract: Proponents of voter qualifications like literacy tests and felon disenfranchisement argue they cultivate a more qualified electorate by deterring those who lack political knowledge or have questionable moral character. However, opponents have argued these reforms reflect thinly veiled attempts to disenfranchise voters of color, suggesting racial attitudes undergird support for restrictive voter qualifications. Adding to the literature on accessible or restrictive election laws, this study examines the extent to which anti-Black attitudes influence public support for literacy tests and felon disenfranchisement. Using a battery of questions tapping anti-Black attitudes, results confirm anti-Black attitudes underpin support for restrictive voter qualifications, including modern-day literacy tests. That is, anti-Black attitudes are a strong predictor of who white Americans see as fit for the ballot box.

Democratic Decline in the US: How Minority Population Growth Affects Election Administration (w. L. Maltby and R. Rocha)

Abstract: While many forms of voter suppression have faded since the 1965 Voting Rights Act, more subtle tactics such as manipulating where election administrators place key resources such as polling site locations and trained poll workers. Are such tactics systematically connected to race? We argue that counties experiencing changes to the local Black and Latino population sizes respond by reducing the number of poll workers and polling sites. We also argue that this relationship is exacerbated by the release of certain states and counties from the Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act’s ‘preclearance’ requirement, increased voter turnout, and partisan politics, all potentially to curb nonwhite political influence. Using administrative data from the Election Administration and Voting Survey combined with demographic data from the American Community Survey, we find that counties are responsive to changes in the Latino population, though not changes in the Black population, reducing access to election resources in areas with growing Latino populations. This relationship is especially pronounced in areas with a history of voter discrimination. Given the importance of polling places and workers for in- person voting, our findings raise serious concerns for racial equality in election access and influence

Measuring the Extent to Which Voter Fraud Beliefs Link Voter (In)convenience to Voter Confidence

Abstract: A frequent argument in favor of increasing the difficulty of registering and voting in elections is to increase voter confidence in election outcomes. For example, in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board (2007), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld an Indiana voter ID law partially on the basis that it may increase confidence in election outcomes. However previous research is mixed on whether voter ID requirements, or more restrictive voting environments in general, increase public confidence in vote counts. Most work finds there is no effect, with other work suggesting that the effect differs by partisanship. This study seeks to examine the extent to which more restrictive voting environments influence confidence in the vote count. Using the Survey of the Performance of American Elections (2012-2020) to gauge public confidence in personal, local, state, and national vote counts, and the Cost of Voting Index (2012-2020) to measure the restrictiveness of state election environments, this study finds that increasing restrictiveness does not increase confidence among the general public. However, it does increase confidence in those who perceive greater fraud, conservatives, and Republicans. At the same time, it decreases confidence among those who perceive less fraud, liberals, and Democrats. Results suggest increasing voting restrictiveness is failing to instill broad confidence in voting outcomes.

A Racial Model of Electoral Reform: The Relationship Between Restrictive Voting Policies and Voter Confidence Between Black and White Voters (with C. Clark)

Abstract: In Crawford v. Marion County (2008), the Supreme Court ruled voter identification requirements are lawful on the grounds that, even if they do not prevent fraud, they can instill confidence in voting. However, this reasoning ignores the historical and contemporary racial biases in the enactment, implementation, and administration of restrictive voting policies in the United States. This legacy likely colors the extent to which Black and white voters see reforms as deterring fraud versus increasing suppression, and as such, how confident they are in election outcomes. We examine how increasing voter restrictions affects voter fraud beliefs and voter confidence among Black and white voters. We find enacting restrictive policies decrease fraud beliefs among white voters but has no effect on fraud beliefs for Black voters; however, Black voters are less confident in elections when conducted with more restrictive policies while white voters are not. Lastly, we find additional evidence that the racial gap in the effects of restrictive voting policies on voter confidence is partially undergirded by racial elite signaling.

The Indebted Citizen: Student Loans as a Catalyst for Youth Participation (w. C. Juelich)

Abstract: Over the past several decades, higher education costs have skyrocketed while government aid has decreased. This has led the most recent generations to take on a significant financial burden to obtain post-secondary education. Alongside this increased debt has also been increased political salience of student debt. Together, the burden of student debt and politicization of it has led to student debt acting as a generational effect wherein student debt shapes the attitudes and behaviors of younger Americans in ways distinct from previous generations. Using the Cooperative Election Study (2014-2020), this study finds student debt is positively related to campaign contact and political participation for young Americans while homeownership tends to have more mixed effects. The opposite trends are uncovered for older Americans. These results suggest student debt acts as a generational effect, with suggestive evidence student debt may be replacing homeownership as a catalyst of political participation for the newest generations.

Working Papers

At the Intersection of Age, Gender, and Sexuality: How Candidate Identities Affect Candidate Evaluations in an Experimental Setting (with C. Juelich)

Abstract: The goal of this project is to uncover the hidden biases candidates may face based on age, gender, and sexuality. Though previous studies have investigated age, gender, and the intersection thereof, few have examined how candidate sexuality and the resulting intersections with age and gender affect support. Our finding suggest that the influence of sexuality greatly trumps that of age or gender, with non-heterosexual candidates receiving decreased support, respectively. Further analyses suggest that young, gay, female candidates are the most disadvantaged.

The Role of Values on the Conditional Effect of Ballot Initiatives on Youth Turnout (w. C. Juelich and S. LaCombe)

Abstract: Previous work has shown young Americans are more likely to vote in states with ballot initiatives that emphasize the issues youths care about. However, past work has examined only two ballot initiative issues salient to youths- marijuana and higher education -and used aggregate analysis. Expanding on this work, we argue these two issues reflect a broader value system frequently subscribed to by younger voters- post-materialist values (e.g., self-actualization, need for political freedom) -and that youths will be more likely to vote when ballot initiatives emphasize post-materialist values. At the same time, the influence of these initiatives on youth turnout should differ by the extent to which individuals possess post-materialist values, potentially explaining part of the variation in youth voter turnout. To investigate the impact of post-material ballot initiatives, we topic code all ballot measures from each of the 50 states from 2006-2022, use the CES to measure relative materialist versus post-materialist value systems among youths, then examine whether post-material ballot initiatives mobilize all youth voters or whether these effects are concentrated among youths that score highly along this dimension.

Electoral Reforms as Policy Influencing Factors? The Partisan, Participatory, and Policy Implications of Registration and Voting Requirements (w. P. Gauding and M. Jirgal [undergraduate student])

Abstract: Conventional wisdom suggests making voting more difficult deters turnout of those more likely to vote Democrat, such as Black, Latino, and young Americans. While numerous studies have examined the accuracy of this conventional wisdom, no work has examined whether changes in who votes due to changing election access goes on to affect public policy. This study examines how restrictive changes to voter access affect turnout of (likely) Democrats, and whether decreasing voter access leads to more conservative public policy. Using data from the Cost of Voting Index, voter surveys, and measures of state policy liberalism, we model the relationship between the enactment of restrictive voter policies, voter turnout, and policy outcomes at the state level. Preliminary results suggest (likely) Democrats are less likely to vote in states that enact more restrictive voting policies, and that public policy is more conservative in those same states. The results of this study raise normative concerns regarding the ability of legislators to effectively select who votes, political equality across the United States, and the access vs. security debate surrounding electoral reforms.

Do Strict Identification Requirements Affect Voter Turnout? Evidence from 2012, 2016, and 2020 National Voter Files (w. C. Tolbert)

Abstract: Few topics have resulted in such contentious debates as the effects of U.S. state voter identification laws on voter turnout, especially in their potential to restrict some demographic groups from voting. The results of extensive previous research are inclusive, with conflicting results. By 2020 more than 35 states had passed some form of voter identification (ID) requirement, with many of these laws being enacted in the last two decades. Proponents of voter ID laws argue that they are necessary for decreasing fraud and instilling confidence in the election process, though evidence suggests electoral fraud is rare (Minnite 2009). Given the proliferation of these laws, there is a need to understand their effects, particularly for groups defined by race, ethnicity, age and income. Diverging from previous research based on survey or Census data, this study uses the national voter files from the 2012, 2016 and 2020 elections covering nearly all American adults to study the effects of voter identification laws on overall turnout and demographic subgroups. The results provide consistent evidence that photo and strict forms of voter ID reduce voter turnout, especially for white non-Hispanics, Hispanics, young and poor people.

A Placebo Test: Automatic Voter Registration (AVR)’s Differential Effects on Turnout (w. C. Tolbert)

Abstract: Registration presents a significant barrier to voting, particularly for those of low socio-economic status and racial and ethnic minorities. Automatic voter registration (AVR) seeks to reduce that barrier by automatically registering/updating voter registration when eligible citizens interact with government offices (e.g., DMV). Dong so automatically helps the voter surmount the registration barrier while creating cleaner and up-to-date voter rolls poll workers can use to verify voting eligibility or campaigns can use to mobilize potential supporters. To estimate the effect of AVR on voter turnout, this study leverages the natural experiment of the rollout of AVR in the American states through a placebo test design used to mitigate concerns of endogeneity in electoral reform enactment and participation. We find that voter turnout increases from 4-8 percentage points in treatment states compared to control states. Further, we find that Black respondents benefited the greatest from AVR, followed by Asian then White respondents, with Hispanic respondents seeing no statistically significant effect.