Procedural Polarization

How Election Rules Shape Voters’ Confidence

Bibliographic Data

ID19213404
AuthorsJoshua D Clinton (0000-0003-1683-9479, Vanderbilt University, corresponding author)
Year2026
Pages1-15
Publication date2026-05-05
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueAmerican Political Science Review (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0003-0554 • E-ISSN: 1537-5943
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s000305542610166x
OpenAlexW7160319286
LanguageEN
References cited61

Prior research demonstrates voters’ confidence in elections depends on whether their preferred candidate wins, but does agreement with the electoral rules being used also matter? Leveraging growing procedural polarization in election laws, public opinion data from 2008 to 2024, and a large-scale survey experiment conducted before the 2024 election, I show that agreement with election procedures matters for voter confidence beyond well-established effects related to partisan control and electoral outcomes. Observational and experimental analyses consistently reveal that voters are less likely to express confidence in election results conducted using procedures they oppose. The effects are particularly large for voter identification laws and among Republicans and independents. The findings underscore a tension in American federalism: as states increasingly adopt divergent electoral rules aligned with co-partisan preferences, partisan divides in electoral confidence may deepen. If so, procedural responsiveness to partisan preferences may undermine electoral confidence and, in turn, perceptions of electoral legitimacy

Identification (biology) · Motivated reasoning · National election · Perception · Polarization (electrochemistry) · Public opinion · Voting · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · Populism, Right-Wing Movements · Social Media and Politics

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access