IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0293239.html

Forensic analysis of the Turkey 2023 presidential election reveals extreme vote swings in remote areas

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Klimek
  • Ahmet Aykaç
  • Stefan Thurner

Abstract

Concerns about the integrity of Turkey’s elections have increased with the recent transition from a parliamentary democracy to an executive presidency under Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Election forensics tools are used to identify statistical traces of certain types of electoral fraud, providing important information about the integrity and validity of democratic elections. Such analyses of the 2017 and 2018 Turkish elections revealed that malpractices such as ballot stuffing or voter manipulation may indeed have played a significant role in determining the election results. Here, we apply election forensic statistical tests for ballot stuffing and voter manipulation to the results of the 2023 presidential election in Turkey. We find that both rounds of the 2023 presidential election exhibit similar statistical irregularities to those observed in the 2018 presidential election, however the magnitude of these distortions has decreased. We estimate that 2.4% (SD 1.9%) and 1.9% (SD 1.7%) of electoral units may have been affected by ballot stuffing practices in favour of Erdoğan in the first and second rounds, respectively, compared to 8.5% (SD 3.9%) in 2018. Areas with smaller polling stations and fewer ballot boxes had significantly inflated votes and turnout, again, in favor of Erdoğan. Furthermore, electoral districts with two or fewer ballot boxes were more likely to show large swings in vote shares in favour of Erdoğan from the first to the second round. Based on a statistical model, it is estimated that these shifts account for 342,000 additional ballots (SD 4,900) or 0.64% for Erdoğan, which is lower than the 4.36% margin by which Erdoğan was victorious. Our results suggest that Turkish elections continue to be riddled with statistical irregularities, that may be indicative of electoral fraud.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Klimek & Ahmet Aykaç & Stefan Thurner, 2023. "Forensic analysis of the Turkey 2023 presidential election reveals extreme vote swings in remote areas," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(11), pages 1-15, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0293239
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293239
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0293239
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0293239&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0293239?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ezequiel Gonzalez-Ocantos & Chad Kiewiet de Jonge & Carlos Meléndez & David Nickerson & Javier Osorio, 2020. "Carrots and sticks: Experimental evidence of vote-buying and voter intimidation in Guatemala," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(1), pages 46-61, January.
    2. Beber, Bernd & Scacco, Alexandra, 2012. "What the Numbers Say: A Digit-Based Test for Election Fraud," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(2), pages 211-234, April.
    3. Rozenas, Arturas, 2017. "Detecting Election Fraud from Irregularities in Vote-Share Distributions," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(1), pages 41-56, January.
    4. Frye, Timothy & Reuter, Ora John & Szakonyi, David, 2019. "Hitting Them With Carrots: Voter Intimidation and Vote Buying in Russia – CORRIGENDUM," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(3), pages 882-882, July.
    5. Montgomery, Jacob M. & Olivella, Santiago & Potter, Joshua D. & Crisp, Brian F., 2015. "An Informed Forensics Approach to Detecting Vote Irregularities," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 488-505.
    6. Gueron, Eduardo & Pellegrini, Jerônimo, 2022. "Application of Benford–Newcomb law with base change to electoral fraud detection," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 607(C).
    7. Cantú, Francisco & Saiegh, Sebastián M., 2011. "Fraudulent Democracy? An Analysis of Argentina's Infamous Decade Using Supervised Machine Learning," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(4), pages 409-433.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christoph Koenig, 2024. "With a Little Help From the Crowd: Estimating Election Fraud with Forensic Methods," CEIS Research Paper 584, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 28 Oct 2024.
    2. Peter Klimek & Raúl Jiménez & Manuel Hidalgo & Abraham Hinteregger & Stefan Thurner, 2018. "Forensic analysis of Turkish elections in 2017–2018," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-14, October.
    3. Ananyev, Maxim & Poyker, Michael, 2022. "Do dictators signal strength with electoral fraud?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    4. Casas, Agustín & Díaz, Guillermo & Trindade, André, 2017. "Who monitors the monitor? Effect of party observers on electoral outcomes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 136-149.
    5. Koenig, Christoph, 2019. "Patronage and Election Fraud: Insights from Russia’s Governors 2000–2012," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 433, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    6. Marius Jula, 2015. "Using R for Identification of Data Inconsistency in Electoral Models," Romanian Statistical Review, Romanian Statistical Review, vol. 63(3), pages 101-108, September.
    7. Christopher Blattman & Horacio Larreguy & Benjamin Marx & Otis Reid, 2019. "Eat Widely, Vote Wisely ? Lessons from a Campaign Against Vote Buying in Uganda," Sciences Po Economics Publications (main) hal-03608420, HAL.
    8. Eric Zitzewitz, 2012. "Forensic Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 50(3), pages 731-769, September.
    9. Christopher W. Blair & Jonathan A. Chu & Joshua A. Schwartz, 2022. "The Two Faces of Opposition to Chemical Weapons: Sincere Versus Insincere Norm-Holders," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 66(4-5), pages 677-703, May.
    10. Benjamin Crost & Joseph H Felter & Hani Mansour & Daniel I Rees, 0. "Narrow Incumbent Victories and Post-Election Conflict: Evidence from the Philippines," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 34(3), pages 767-789.
    11. Koenig, Christoph, "undated". "Competence vs. Loyalty: Political survival and electoral fraud in Russia’s regions 2000–2012," Economic Research Papers 270014, University of Warwick - Department of Economics.
    12. Lauren E Young, 2020. "Who dissents? Self-efficacy and opposition action after state-sponsored election violence," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(1), pages 62-76, January.
    13. Aluykov, Maxim & Gilev, Aleksei & Nadporozhskii, Ilia & Vyrskaia, Marina & Rumiantseva, Aleksandra & Zavadskaya, Margarita, 2024. "Panel Study of Russian Public Opinion and Attitudes (PROPA) Wave 2," OSF Preprints g4an5, Center for Open Science.
    14. Karlo Kauko, 2024. "How to detect what drives deviations from Benford’s law? An application to bank deposit data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 67(3), pages 1045-1061, September.
    15. Montag, Josef, 2015. "Identifying Odometer Fraud: Evidence from the Used Car Market in the Czech Republic," MPRA Paper 65182, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Hager, Anselm & Hennicke, Moritz & Krause, Werner & Mergele, Lukas, 2021. "Privatizations Spark Socialist Backlash: Evidence from East Germany’s Transformation," OSF Preprints cmsyn, Center for Open Science.
    17. Oana Borcan, 2016. "The illicit beneficts of local party alignment in national elections," University of East Anglia School of Economics Working Paper Series 2016-10, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    18. Petr Wawrosz, 2022. "How Corruption Is and Should Be Investigated by Economic Theory," Economies, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-23, December.
    19. Escobari, Diego & Hoover, Gary A., 2024. "Late-Arriving Votes and Electoral Fraud: A Natural Experiment and Regression Discontinuity Evidence from Bolivia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    20. Valeria Babayan & Israel Marques II & Michael Mironyuk & Aleksei Turobov, 2021. "Public Trust In Internet Voting Systems: Evidence From Russian Public Opinion," HSE Working papers WP BRP 83/PS/2021, National Research University Higher School of Economics.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0293239. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.