Michael Cowan

Ranking Bad: The Chemistry of Ranked-Choice Voting

Introduction

Ranking bad: the chemistry of ranked-choice voting. Party labels largely neutralize voter biases against BIPOC candidates in Canadian ranked-choice voting, fostering equitable representation. Crucial for electoral reform.

Abstract

Crowder-Meyer et al. (2023) found that in U.S. ranked-choice voting (RCV) elections, Black, Asian, and Hispanic candidates consistently faced electoral disadvantages regardless of the informational context. This study, which adapts their approach to a Canadian setting, employs a conjoint experimental design to examine whether providing party labels can mitigate biases that hinder the electoral prospects of BIPOC candidates in a hypothetical Canadian RCV election scenario. Our findings indicate that, absent partisan cues, BIPOC candidates experience marked penalties, with voters across the political spectrum engaging in negative partisanship and affinity voting. Yet, when party affiliations are introduced, these disadvantages largely vanish. While our results are constrained by a non-representative sample of participants from Ontario, they provide preliminary evidence that the availability of partisan cues can help neutralize voter biases and foster more equitable representation. These findings highlight the critical role of informational contexts in shaping voter behaviour and suggest that coupling electoral reforms like RCV with robust voter education initiatives could play a pivotal role in reducing systemic barriers to equitable representation for BIPOC candidates in Canada.

Review

This study, "Ranking Bad: The Chemistry of Ranked-Choice Voting," presents a timely and critical examination of how ranked-choice voting (RCV) might perpetuate or mitigate electoral disadvantages for Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour (BIPOC) candidates in a Canadian context. Building on previous U.S.-based research by Crowder-Meyer et al. (2023), the authors skillfully adapt a conjoint experimental design to investigate the pivotal role of party labels as informational cues. The core research question addresses whether the introduction of partisan affiliations can counteract inherent biases that might otherwise hinder BIPOC candidates' electoral prospects within a hypothetical Canadian RCV scenario, a domain previously underexplored with this specific focus. The methodology employed, a conjoint experimental design, is well-suited to disentangle the effects of various candidate attributes, including ethnicity and party affiliation, on voter preferences. The findings reveal a compelling dynamic: without partisan cues, BIPOC candidates consistently face "marked penalties," which the study attributes to negative partisanship and affinity voting among a politically diverse electorate. However, the introduction of party labels dramatically alters this landscape, largely dissolving these disadvantages. This suggests that the presence of partisan information serves as a powerful neutralizing agent against voter biases, allowing voters to align more with party loyalty than with unstated ethnic preferences or biases. While the authors prudently acknowledge the primary limitation of a non-representative sample drawn solely from Ontario, the study nonetheless provides valuable preliminary evidence regarding the significant impact of informational contexts on voter behaviour in RCV systems. The results underscore the critical role of partisan cues in fostering more equitable representation and highlight that electoral reforms, such as RCV, should not be implemented in isolation. Instead, they argue for coupling such reforms with "robust voter education initiatives" to maximize their potential in reducing systemic barriers. This research makes a significant contribution to our understanding of electoral psychology and the design of equitable voting systems, offering important implications for policymakers and advocates in Canada and beyond.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.