In this study, we contribute to the research field concerning early voting by examining the rejection of early votes in the general election in Sweden in 2022. The results show that the rejection rate of early votes in Sweden is high, which is of course problematic because eligible voters who vote should not have their ballots rejected because of errors. Contrary to our theoretical expectations, we did not find any patterns in the level of rejected early votes among the municipalities. We also examine why early votes are rejected, and the findings demonstrate that errors of different kinds occur, though some are more common than others, for example, putting more than one ballot paper in a ballot envelope seems to be a common problem. Finally, we provide several recommendations for the Election Authority concerning how the level of rejection of early votes can be reduced in Sweden.
AlvarezRM, AtkesonLR, and HallTE. 2007. The New Mexico Election Administration Report: The 2006 November General Election. Albuquerque. <http://vote2006.unm.edu/NM_Election_Report.pdf>
3.
AlvarezR. Michael, CaoJian, and LiYimeng. 2021. “Voting experiences, perceptions of fraud, and voter confidence.” Social Science Quarterly, 102(4):1225–1238.
4.
AtkesonLonna Rae and SaundersKyle L.. 2007. “The effect of election administration on voter confidence: A local matter?” PS: Political Science & Politics, 40(4):655–660.
5.
BaringerA., HerronMc., and SmithDA.. 2020. “Voting by Mail and Ballot rejection: Lessons from florida for elections in the age of the Coronavirus.” Election Law Journal, 19(3):289–320.
6.
BlaisA, DobrzynskaA., and Loewen.P. 2007. Potential Impacts of Extended Advance Voting on Voter Turnout. Elections Canada.
7.
BrothénM.(ed.). 2003. Svenska poströstare. Göteborg: Statsvetenskapliga institutionen: Göteborgs universitet.
8.
BryantLA. 2020. “Seeing is believing: An experiment on absentee ballots and voter confidence.” American Political Research, 48(6):700–704.
9.
BurdenBC., et al.2009. “The effects and costs of early voting, election day registration, and same day registration in the 2008 elections.” Report Prepared for the Pew Charitable Trusts, Center on the States
10.
BurdenBarry C., et al.2014. “Election laws, mobilization, and turnout: The unanticipated consequences of election reform.” American Journal of Political Science, 58(1):95–109.
11.
BurdenBarry C., et al.2017. “What happens at the polling place: Using administrative data to look inside elections.” Public Administration Review, 77(3):354–364.
12.
CottrellDavid, HerronMichael C., and SmithDaniel A.. 2021. “Vote-by-mail ballot rejection and experience with mail-in voting.” American Politics Research, 49(6):577–590.
13.
DeMoraStephanie L., MichelsonMelissa R., and TranDari S.. 2022. “Don't dismiss digital immigrants: Poll workers and new election technologies.” Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy, 21(3):249–258.
14.
DownsA. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. Harper & Row: New York.
ElklitJørgen and MaleyMichael. 2019. “Why ballot secrecy still matters.” Journal of Democracy, 30(3):61–75.
17.
EsaiassonPeter, FredénAnnika, and TeorellJan. 2023. “Details matter: Secluded areas and voting secrecy with french ballots.” Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy, 22(4):327–336.
18.
FortierJc and OrnsteinNj.. 2003. “The absentee ballot and the secret ballot: Challenges for election reform.” U. Mich. JL Reform, 36:483–516.
19.
GarnettHolly Ann. 2019. “Early voting: Comparing Canada, Finland, Germany, and Switzerland.” Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy, 18(2):116–131.
20.
GoerresAchim and FunkEvelyn. 2019. “Who counts, counts: An exploratory analysis of how local authorities organise the electoral count in Germany’s most populous State.” German Politics, 28(1):61–79.
21.
GronkeP. 2008. “Early voting reforms and American elections.” William & Mary Law Review, 17(2):423–452.
22.
HallThad, MonsonJ. Quin, and PattersonKelly D.. 2007. “Poll workers and the vitality of democracy: An early assessment.” PS: Political Science & Politics, 40(4):647–654.
23.
HögströmJohn. 2021. “What characteristics affect early voting? the case of Sweden.” European Political Science, 20(2):281–296.
24.
HögströmJ and JerhovC. 2022. Poll Workers’ Views of How Elections Work in Sweden: A Survey Conducted after the 2022 Election.'. Mid Sweden University, Sundsvall and Östersund.
25.
HögströmJohn and JerhovChristian. 2023a. “Complaints concerning electoral fraud and administrative inaccuracies: A study of complaints about the parliamentary elections in Sweden between 2010 and 2018.” Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy, 22(1):27–44.
26.
HögströmJohn and JerhovChristian. 2023b. “On the frontline of democracy: Poll workers’ evaluations of elections.” European Political Science, 23(2):133–155. Online first.
27.
HopkinsDaniel J., et al.2022. “Whose vote is lost by mail? evidence from Philadelphia in the 2020 general election.” Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy, 21(4):329–348.
28.
KarpJeffrey A and BanducciSusan A.. 2001. “Absentee voting, mobilization, and participation.” American Politics Research, 29(2):183–195.
29.
KropfMartha E. 2012. “Does early voting change the socio‐economic composition of the electorate?” Poverty & Public Policy, 4(1):1–19.
30.
LijphartArend. 1997. “Unequal participation: Democracy’s unresolved dilemma.” American Political Science Review, 91(1):1–14.
31.
LundellKrister and HögströmJohn. 2021. “Institutions or the societal setting? explaining invalid voting in local elections in Sweden.” Scandinavian Political Studies, 44(3):280–298.
32.
LundmarkSebastian, OscarssonHenrik, and WeissenbilderMarcus. 2020. “Confidence in an election authority and satisfaction with democracy: Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment of a failed election in Sweden.” Electoral Studies, 67:102216.
33.
MeredithMarc and MalhotraNeil. 2011. “Convenience voting can affect election outcomes.” Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy, 10(3):227–253.
34.
MerivakiThessalia and Suttmann-LeaMara. 2023. “Can electoral management bodies expand the pool of registered voters? examining the effects of face-to-face, remote, traditional, and social media outreach.” Policy Studies, 44(3):377–407.
35.
OliverJ. Eric. 1996. “The effects of eligibility restrictions and party activity on absentee voting and overall turnout.” American Journal of Political Science, 40(2):498–513.
36.
PlesciaCarolina., BlaisAndré., and HögströmJohn.. 2020. “Do people want a ‘Fairer’ electoral system? An experimental study in four Countries.” European Journal of Political Research, 59(4):733–751.
37.
RikerWilliam H and OrdeshookPeter C.. 1968. “A theory of the calculus of voting.” American Political Science Review, 62(1):25–42.
38.
ScalaNatalie M., et al.2022. “Evaluating mail‐based security for electoral processes using attack trees.” Risk Analysis: An Official Publication of the Society for Risk Analysis, 42(10):2327–2343.
ShinoEnrijeta, Suttmann-LeaMara, and SmithDaniel A.. 2022. “Determinants of rejected mail ballots in georgia’s 2018 general election.” Political Research Quarterly, 75(1):231–243.
SteinRm and Garcia-MonetPa.. 1997. “Voting early but not often.” Social Science Quarterly, 78(3):657–671.
43.
Suttmann-LeaM and MerivakiT.. 2022. “Don’t drown the message: The effects of voter education on mail ballot acceptance in North Carolina.” Journal of Election Administration Research and Practice, 1(2):69–95.
44.
TeorellJ. 2012. Omval och andra omtagningar under 300 år. In: Omstritt omval. (BergL and OscarssonH .eds.) SOM-institutetet: Gothenburg, Sweden, pp 39–54.
45.
TownsleyJoshua., et al.2023. “Who votes by post? understanding the drivers of postal voting in the 2019 british general election.” Parliamentary Affairs, 76(1):43–61.
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
