IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/xhuz5_v1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What drives public trust in elections? Experimental evidence from Malawi

Author

Listed:
  • Ahlback, Johan
  • Yeandle, Alexander

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Ahlback, Johan & Yeandle, Alexander, 2025. "What drives public trust in elections? Experimental evidence from Malawi," OSF Preprints xhuz5_v1, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:xhuz5_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/xhuz5_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/68a42e6a198e4baf0e8a8a96/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/xhuz5_v1?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. Marlene Mauk, 2022. "Electoral integrity matters: how electoral process conditions the relationship between political losing and political trust," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 1709-1728, June.
    2. Michael Callen & James D. Long, 2015. "Institutional Corruption and Election Fraud: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Afghanistan," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(1), pages 354-381, January.
    3. Ascencio, Sergio J. & Rueda, Miguel R., 2019. "Partisan Poll Watchers and Electoral Manipulation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 113(3), pages 727-742, August.
    4. Young, Lauren E., 2019. "The Psychology of State Repression: Fear and Dissent Decisions in Zimbabwe," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 113(1), pages 140-155, February.
    5. repec:cup:apsrev:v:113:y:2019:i:03:p:727-742_00 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Leeper, Thomas J. & Hobolt, Sara B. & Tilley, James, 2020. "Measuring Subgroup Preferences in Conjoint Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 207-221, April.
    7. Bridgett A. King, 2017. "Policy and Precinct: Citizen Evaluations and Electoral Confidence," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 98(2), pages 672-689, June.
    8. Benjamin Marx & Vincent Pons & Tavneet Suri, 2021. "Voter Mobilisation and Trust in Electoral Institutions: Evidence from Kenya," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(638), pages 2585-2612.
    9. Conroy-Krutz, Jeffrey, 2013. "Information and Ethnic Politics in Africa," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 345-373, April.
    10. Cummings, Ronald G. & Martinez-Vazquez, Jorge & McKee, Michael & Torgler, Benno, 2009. "Tax morale affects tax compliance: Evidence from surveys and an artefactual field experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 447-457, June.
    11. Seeberg, Merete Bech, 2021. "How State Capacity Helps Autocrats win Elections," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 51(2), pages 541-558, April.
    12. Miguel R. Rueda, 2017. "Small Aggregates, Big Manipulation: Vote Buying Enforcement and Collective Monitoring," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(1), pages 163-177, January.
    13. Brancati, Dawn, 2014. "Building Confidence in Elections: The Case of Electoral Monitors in Kosova," Journal of Experimental Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 6-15, April.
    14. Jahnke, Björn & Weisser, Reinhard A., 2019. "How does petty corruption affect tax morale in Sub-Saharan Africa?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    15. Yusuf Neggers, 2018. "Enfranchising Your Own? Experimental Evidence on Bureaucrat Diversity and Election Bias in India," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(6), pages 1288-1321, June.
    16. Hainmueller, Jens & Hopkins, Daniel J. & Yamamoto, Teppei, 2014. "Causal Inference in Conjoint Analysis: Understanding Multidimensional Choices via Stated Preference Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 1-30, January.
    17. Brady, Henry E. & Mcnulty, John E., 2011. "Turning Out to Vote: The Costs of Finding and Getting to the Polling Place," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 105(1), pages 115-134, February.
    18. Challú, Cristian & Seira, Enrique & Simpser, Alberto, 2020. "The Quality of Vote Tallies: Causes and Consequences," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 114(4), pages 1071-1085, November.
    19. Choi, Donghyun Danny & Harris, J. Andrew & Shen-Bayh, Fiona, 2022. "Ethnic Bias in Judicial Decision Making: Evidence from Criminal Appeals in Kenya," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 116(3), pages 1067-1080, August.
    20. Leeper, Thomas J. & Hobolt, Sara & Tilley, James, 2020. "Measuring subgroup preferences in conjoint experiments," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 100944, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    21. Eva‐Maria Egger & Sam Jones & Patricia Justino & Ivan Manhique & Ricardo Santos, 2023. "Africa's lockdown dilemma: High poverty and low trust," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 35(7), pages 1648-1666, October.
    22. Rundlett, Ashlea & Svolik, Milan W., 2016. "Deliver the Vote! Micromotives and Macrobehavior in Electoral Fraud," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 110(1), pages 180-197, February.
    23. Andrew Harris, J., 2015. "What's in a Name? A Method for Extracting Information about Ethnicity from Names," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(2), pages 212-224, April.
    24. Robert M. Gonzalez, 2021. "Cell Phone Access and Election Fraud: Evidence from a Spatial Regression Discontinuity Design in Afghanistan," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 13(2), pages 1-51, April.
    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. Henrik Serup Christensen & Lauri Rapeli, 2021. "Immediate rewards or delayed gratification? A conjoint survey experiment of the public’s policy preferences," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 63-94, March.
    2. Tukiainen, Janne & Blesse, Sebastian & Bohne, Albrecht & Giuffrida, Leonardo M. & Jääskeläinen, Jan & Luukinen, Ari & Sieppi, Antti, 2024. "What are the priorities of bureaucrats? Evidence from conjoint experiments with procurement officials," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    3. J. Andrew Harris & Catherine Kamindo & Peter van der Windt, 2020. "Electoral Administration in Fledgling Democracies:Experimental Evidence from Kenya," Working Papers 20200036, New York University Abu Dhabi, Department of Social Science, revised Jan 2020.
    4. Fumiya Uchikoshi & Hirofumi Miwa & Yoshikuni Ono, 2025. "Gendered Expectations for College Applications: Experimental Evidence from a Gender Inegalitarian Education Context," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 66(5), pages 1-27, August.
    5. Michael J. Frith, 2021. "Analysing conjoint experiments in Stata: the conjoint command," London Stata Conference 2021 14, Stata Users Group.
    6. Kim, Sung Eun & Park, Jong Hee & Rhee, Inbok & Yang, Joonseok, 2025. "What do aid recipients want? Public attitudes toward foreign aid in developing countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    7. Chu, Haoran & Liu, Sixiao, 2021. "Light at the end of the tunnel: Influence of vaccine availability and vaccination intention on people’s consideration of the COVID-19 vaccine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 286(C).
    8. Lim, Sijeong & Dolsak, Nives & Prakash, Aseem & Tanaka, Seiki, 2022. "Distributional concerns and public opinion: EV subsidies in the U.S. and Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    9. Faradj Koliev & Karin Bäckstrand, 2025. "Citizen preferences for climate policy implementation: the role of multistakeholder partnerships," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 41-59, March.
    10. Nela Mrchkovska & Nives Dolšak & Aseem Prakash, 2024. "Morality meets menu: investigating the impact of moral appeals on vegetarianism through a conjoint survey experiment," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 177(3), pages 1-19, March.
    11. Yuko KASUYA & Hirofumi MIWA & Yoshikuni ONO, 2022. "Why are There More Women in the Upper House?," Discussion papers 22094, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    12. Akira IGARASHI & Hirofumi MIWA & Yoshikuni ONO, 2022. "How Do Racial Cues Affect Attitudes toward Immigrants in a Racially Homogeneous Country? Evidence from a survey experiment in Japan," Discussion papers 22091, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    13. Henrik S Christensen & Marco S La Rosa & Kimmo Grönlund, 2020. "How candidate characteristics affect favorability in European Parliament elections: Evidence from a conjoint experiment in Finland," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(3), pages 519-540, September.
    14. Burak Sonmez & Kirils Makarovs & Nick Allum, 2023. "Public perception of scientists: Experimental evidence on the role of sociodemographic, partisan, and professional characteristics," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(7), pages 1-20, July.
    15. Krawczyk, Michal & Blasco, Andrea & Gajderowicz, Tomasz & Giergiczny, Marek, 2024. "Support for temporary protection of displaced populations in the EU: A conjoint experiment," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    16. Liam F. Beiser-McGrath & Thomas Bernauer & Jaehyun Song & Azusa Uji, 2021. "Understanding public support for domestic contributions to global collective goods," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(3), pages 1-20, June.
    17. Knotz, Carlo Michael & Gandenberger, Mia Katharina & Fossati, Flavia & Bonoli, Giuliano, 2021. "Public attitudes toward pandemic triage: Evidence from conjoint survey experiments in Switzerland," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 285(C).
    18. Janne Tukiainen & Ilona Lahdelma & Mika Maliranta & Risto Rönkkö & Juho Saari, 2024. "The TikTok factor: Young voters and the support for the populist right," Working Papers 351, Työn ja talouden tutkimus LABORE, The Labour Institute for Economic Research LABORE.
    19. Joop Age Harm Adema & Lasha Chargaziia & Yvonne Giesing & Sarah Necker & Panu Poutvaara, 2025. "What Drives Refugees' Return After Conflict?," CESifo Working Paper Series 12118, CESifo.
    20. Barceló, Joan & Sheen, Greg Chih-Hsin & Tung, Hans H. & Wu, Wen-Chin, 2022. "Vaccine nationalism among the public: A cross-country experimental evidence of own-country bias towards COVID-19 vaccination," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 310(C).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:osf:osfxxx:xhuz5_v1. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.