How to Distinguish Human Error From Election Fraud: Evidence From the 2019 Malawi Election

Abstract Voters and politicians often blame tallying irregularities on fraud, undermining perceptions of democratic and electoral credibility. Yet such irregularities also result from capacity failures and human error. We introduce several methods to assess competing causes of tallying irregularities leveraging the quasi-random administration of polling stations. Using these methods, we revisit the case of the 2019 Malawian presidential election which was famously canceled by the High Court due to widespread result-sheet edits and accusations of fraud. Contrary to the dominant consensus, we do not find evidence that edits were motivated by fraud or that they benefited the incumbent. Instead, we show that edits increased in proportion to the complexity of filling in result-sheets, suggesting a dominant role for human error. In addition to reinterpreting a historically important election, we also make the case that policy efforts to improve electoral credibility could productively be reallocated towards electoral administration rather than anti-fraud measures.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
British Journal of Political Science
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123425100951
Primary Topic
Benford’s Law and Fraud Detection
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

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

How to Distinguish Human Error From Election Fraud: Evidence From the 2019 Malawi Election

Ryan Jablonski, Johan Ahlbäck
British Journal of Political Science
Benford’s Law and Fraud Detection
article

How to Distinguish Human Error From Election Fraud: Evidence From the 2019 Malawi Election

Ryan Jablonski, Johan Ahlbäck
article en

Abstract

Abstract Voters and politicians often blame tallying irregularities on fraud, undermining perceptions of democratic and electoral credibility. Yet such irregularities also result from capacity failures and human error. We introduce several methods to assess competing causes of tallying irregularities leveraging the quasi-random administration of polling stations. Using these methods, we revisit the case of the 2019 Malawian presidential election which was famously canceled by the High Court due to widespread result-sheet edits and accusations of fraud. Contrary to the dominant consensus, we do not find evidence that edits were motivated by fraud or that they benefited the incumbent. Instead, we show that edits increased in proportion to the complexity of filling in result-sheets, suggesting a dominant role for human error. In addition to reinterpreting a historically important election, we also make the case that policy efforts to improve electoral credibility could productively be reallocated towards electoral administration rather than anti-fraud measures.

British Journal of Political ScienceVol. 55
London School of Economics and Political Science (GB)
London School of Economics and Political Science
Openalex Percentile: Top 69%
Benford’s Law and Fraud Detection
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.