What drives public trust in elections? Experimental evidence from Malawi

International donors have invested heavily in strengthening electoral administration in low-income democracies, aiming to reduce irregularities and build trust. However, we know little about whether these interventions actually improve public perceptions. Using a conjoint choice experiment in Malawi, randomising organisational features of polling stations and their potential for political bias, we examine the determinants of public trust in a low-income setting. Voters are more trusting of stations with well-trained polling staff, independent monitors, security personnel, and transparency measures, effects driven by sanctioning the absence of these basic requirements. Respondents also prioritise procedurally fair measures over those that exclusively benefit their own party or ethnic group, challenging assumptions about the dominance of partisanship and ethnicity in African elections. We contribute to the literature on election administration and public opinion in low-income settings, while highlighting ways in which resource-constrained election bodies can build and maintain public support.

Authors

Publication Details

Published
2025-08-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/xhuz5_v1
Primary Topic
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

What drives public trust in elections? Experimental evidence from Malawi

Johan Ahlbäck, Alex Yeandle
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
article

What drives public trust in elections? Experimental evidence from Malawi

Johan Ahlbäck, Alex Yeandle
article en

Abstract

International donors have invested heavily in strengthening electoral administration in low-income democracies, aiming to reduce irregularities and build trust. However, we know little about whether these interventions actually improve public perceptions. Using a conjoint choice experiment in Malawi, randomising organisational features of polling stations and their potential for political bias, we examine the determinants of public trust in a low-income setting. Voters are more trusting of stations with well-trained polling staff, independent monitors, security personnel, and transparency measures, effects driven by sanctioning the absence of these basic requirements. Respondents also prioritise procedurally fair measures over those that exclusively benefit their own party or ethnic group, challenging assumptions about the dominance of partisanship and ethnicity in African elections. We contribute to the literature on election administration and public opinion in low-income settings, while highlighting ways in which resource-constrained election bodies can build and maintain public support.

London School of Economics and Political Science
Openalex Percentile: Top 79%
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
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.