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

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.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Political Behavior
Published
2025-03-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-025-10028-4
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
25.57
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

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

Stephen Pettigrew, Dylan Radley
3 citations
Political Behavior
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
25.57
article

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

Stephen Pettigrew, Dylan Radley
article en
3 citations

Abstract

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.

Political BehaviorVol. 48(1)
University of Pennsylvania (US), Philadelphia University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Electoral Systems and Political Participation
25.57
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Overvotes, Overranks, and Skips: Mismarked and Rejected Votes in Ranked Choice Voting — Stephen Pettigrew, Dylan Radley · Political Behavior (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS