The direct impacts of long wait times in elections, such as lost wages for voters and suppressed turnout, are well-documented. Drawing upon the service operations literature, we hypothesize that such operational inefficiencies may have far-reaching consequences beyond the immediate voter experience, in particular, the spread of political misinformation. Using a novel dataset that combines granular measures of voter wait times from cellphone location data, social media content, and demographic information at the county level, we find evidence that longer wait times are associated with greater sharing of political fake news on Reddit in the aftermath of the 2016 US presidential election. Importantly, this relationship exhibits significant heterogeneity based on the racial composition of counties, with more diverse counties experiencing greater increases in misinformation spread due to wait times. To shed light on the mechanisms underlying this link, we leverage individual-level survey data on voters’ polling place experiences and perceptions of electoral integrity. Our analysis reveals that experiencing long wait times erodes voters’ confidence in the integrity of the election process, particularly at the local level. These findings underscore the societal importance of efficient election operations management and highlight how they can have profound implications for the health of democracy. Our work introduces a new factor—the operational efficiency of election administration—into the study of political misinformation, thus opening up avenues for operations management research to contribute to a pressing social challenge.
Abouee-MehriziHZareAGKonradRA (2022) Pricing in service systems with rational balking and abandonment of time-sensitive customers. Production and Operations Management31(2): 496–510.
2.
AdamD (2024) Misinformation might sway elections—But not in the way that you think. Nature630: 807–809.
3.
AllcottHGentzkowM (2017) Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. Journal of Economic Perspectives31(2): 211–236.
4.
AllenTTYangMHuangS, et al. (2020) Determining resource requirements for elections using indifference-zone generalized binary search. Computers & Industrial Engineering140: 106243.
5.
AllonGFedergruenAPiersonM (2011) How much is a reduction of your customers’ wait worth? An empirical study of the fast-food drive-thru industry based on structural estimation methods. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management13(4): 489–507.
6.
AtkesonLRSaundersKL (2007) The effect of election administration on voter confidence: A local matter?PS: Political Science & Politics40(4): 655–660.
7.
BelenkyASLarsonRC (2006) To queue or not to queue? In a U.S. presidential election, that should not be a question. OR/MS Today33(3): 30–35.
8.
Bergeron-BoutinOClaytonKKousserT, et al. (2023) Communicating with voters to build trust in the U.S. election system. White paper, MIT Election Data + Science Lab.
9.
BernardoNDKingBAMachtGA (2023) Assessing precinct consolidation strategies through simulation optimization. Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy22(4): 363–380.
10.
BiggersDR (2021) Can the backlash against voter ID laws activate minority voters? Experimental evidence examining voter mobilization through psychological reactance. Political Behavior43: 1161–1179.
11.
BondRMFarissCJJonesJJ, et al. (2012) A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization. Nature489(7415): 295–298.
12.
BozarthLQuerciaDCapraL, et al. (2023) The role of the big geographic sort in online news circulation among US Reddit users. Scientific Reports13(1): 6711.
13.
BrodaEStrömbäckJ (2024) Misinformation, disinformation, and fake news: Lessons from an interdisciplinary, systematic literature review. Annals of the International Communication Association48(2): 139–166.
Byrd JJr (1978) The value of queueing theory. Interfaces8(3): 22–26.
16.
CachonGPKaauaD (2022) Serving democracy: Evidence of voting resource disparity in Florida. Management Science68(9): 6687–6696.
17.
CantarellaMFraccaroliNVolpeR (2023) Does fake news affect voting behaviour?Research Policy52: 104628.
18.
ChenMKHaggagKPopeDG, et al. (2022) Racial disparities in voting wait times: Evidence from smartphone data. The Review of Economics and Statistics104(6): 1341–1350.
19.
ChenSXiaoLKumarA (2023) Spread of misinformation on social media: What contributes to it and how to combat it. Computers in Human Behavior141: 107643.
20.
ÇilE (2021) Managing service systems via disguised queues: The role of retaliating customers. Decision Sciences52(2): 427–454.
21.
CinelliMQuattrociocchiWGaleazziA, et al. (2020) The COVID-19 social media infodemic. Scientific Reports10(1): 16598.
22.
CollianderJ (2019) “This is fake news”: Investigating the role of conformity to other users’ views when commenting on and spreading disinformation in social media. Computers in Human Behavior97: 202–215.
23.
CoutsAWyrichA (2016) Here are all the ’fake news’ sites to watch out for on Facebook.
24.
CrimminsBLHaldermanJASturtB (2024) Improving the security of United States elections with robust optimization. Operations Research73(1): 61–85.
25.
DahmMWentzelDHerzogW, et al. (2018) Breathing down your neck: The impact of queues on customers using a retail service. Journal of Retailing94(2): 217–230.
26.
DeboLGParlourCRajanU (2012) Signaling quality via queues. Management Science58(2): 876–891.
EckerUKLewandowskySCookJ, et al. (2022) The psychological drivers of misinformation belief and its resistance to correction. Nature Reviews Psychology1(1): 13–29.
29.
EpperlyBWitkoCStricklerR, et al. (2020) Rule by violence, rule by law: Lynching, jim crow, and the continuing evolution of voter suppression in the U.S. Perspectives on Politics18(3): 756–769.
30.
FamighettiCMelilloAPérezM (2014) Election day long lines: Resource allocation. Technical report, Brennan Center for Justice, New York.
31.
FiglKKießlingSRankC, et al. (2019) Fake news flags, cognitive dissonance, and the believability of social media posts. In: Proceedings of the international conference on information systems. Association for Information Systems.
32.
FryMJYangM (2013) Using OR to overcome challenges in implementing new voting technologies. In: Wiley encyclopedia of operations research and management science. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
33.
FurnhamATreglownLHorneG (2020) The psychology of queuing. Psychology (Savannah, GA.)11: 480–498.
GrinbergNJosephKFriedlandL, et al. (2019) Fake news on Twitter during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Science (New York, N.Y.)363(6425): 374–378.
36.
GuoPHavivMLuoZ, et al. (2022) Signaling service quality through queue disclosure. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management25(2): 543–562.
37.
GuoPZipkinP (2007) Analysis and comparison of queues with different levels of delay information. Management Science53(6): 962–970.
38.
HajnalZLajevardiNNielsonL (2017) Voter identification laws and the suppression of minority votes. The Journal of Politics79(2): 363–379.
39.
HanJChaMLeeW (2020) Anger contributes to the spread of COVID-19 misinformation. Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review1(3): 1–15.
40.
HeinonenKNichollsR (2022) Customer-to-customer interactions in service. In: Edvardsson B and Tronvoll B (eds) The Palgrave handbook of service management, pp.629–654. Springer International Publishing.
HightonB (2006) Long lines, voting machine availability, and turnout: The case of Franklin County, Ohio in the 2004 presidential election. PS: Political Science & Politics39(1): 65–68.
43.
HornerCGGallettaDCrawfordJ, et al. (2021) Anger contributes to the spread of COVID-19 misinformation. Journal of Management Information Systems38(4): 1039–1066.
44.
House Committee on Homeland Security (2020) Secure, safe, and auditable: Protecting the integrity of the 2020 elections. Technical Report Serial No. 116-81, U.S. Government Publishing Office.
45.
HuMLiYWangJ (2017) Efficient ignorance: Information heterogeneity in a queue. Management Science64(6): 2650–2671.
46.
HwangELeeS (2025) A nudge to credible information as a countermeasure to misinformation: Evidence from Twitter. Information Systems Research36(1): 621–636.
47.
IbrahimR (2018) Sharing delay information in service systems: A literature survey. Queueing Systems89: 49–79.
48.
Jan 6 Committee (2022) Social media & the January 6th attack on the U.S. capitol: Summary of investigative findings. Technical report, House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol.
49.
JunejaPFloridiL (2025) Using Twitter to detect polling place issue reports on U.S. election days. Social Science Computer Review43(3): 543–563.
50.
KimADennisAR (2019) Says who? The effects of presentation format and source rating on fake news in social media. MIS Quarterly43(3): 1025–1039.
51.
KimballDCBaybeckB (2013) Are all jurisdictions equal? Size disparity in election administration. Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy12(2): 130–145.
KoDGMaiFShanZ, et al. (2019) Operational efficiency and patient-centered health care: A view from online physician reviews. Journal of Operations Management65(4): 353–379.
54.
KremerMDeboL (2016) Inferring quality from wait time. Management Science62(10): 3023–3038.
55.
KumarSYangMGoldschmidtKH (2018) Will aging voting machines cause more voters to experience long waits?International Journal of Production Economics198: 1–10.
56.
KuzuKGaoLXuSH (2019) To wait or not to wait: The theory and practice of ticket queues. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management21(4): 853–874.
57.
LambM (2021) Who leaves the line, anyway? A study of who leaves polling place lines, and why. Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy20(3): 301–314.
58.
LarsonRC (1987) Perspectives on queues: Social justice and the psychology of queueing. Operations Research35(6): 895–905.
59.
LazerDMBaumMABenklerY, et al. (2018) The science of fake news. Science (New York, N.Y.)359(6380): 1094–1096.
60.
LeeKRamS (2024) Explainable deep learning for false information identification: An argumentation theory approach. Information Systems Research35(2): 890–907.
61.
LeeSYQiuLWhinstonA (2018) Sentiment manipulation in online platforms: An analysis of movie tweets. Production and Operations Management27(3): 393–416.
62.
LiaoCNChenYJChenV (2023) Spread and control of medical rumors in a social network: A generalized diffusion model with a highly asymmetric network structure. Production and Operations Management32(11): 3683–3698.
63.
LuGDingXDPengDX, et al. (2018) Addressing endogeneity in operations management research: Recent developments, common problems, and directions for future research. Journal of Operations Management64: 53–64.
64.
LuYMusalemAOlivaresM, et al. (2013) Measuring the effect of queues on customer purchases. Management Science59(8): 1743–1763.
MassanariA (2017) #gamergate and the fappening: How Reddit’s algorithm, governance, and culture support toxic technocultures. New Media & Society19(3): 329–346.
68.
MebaneWRKlaverJPinedaA, et al. (2017) Using Twitter to observe election incidents in the United States.
MoravecPMinasRDennisAR (2019) Fake news on social media: People believe what they want to believe when it makes no sense at all. MIS Quarterly43(4): 1343–1360.
71.
MoravecPLKimADennisAR (2020) Appealing to sense and sensibility: System 1 and system 2 interventions for fake news on social media. Information Systems Research31(3): 987–1006.
72.
MoravecPLKimADennisAR, et al. (2022) Do you really know if it’s true? How asking users to rate stories affects belief in fake news on social media. Information Systems Research33(3): 887–907.
73.
MostagirMSideriusJ (2022) Learning in a post-truth world. Management Science68(4): 2860–2868.
74.
MudambiMClarkJRhueL, et al. (2025) Fighting misinformation on social media: An empirical investigation of the impact of prominence reduction policies. Production and Operations Management34(6): 1409–1425.
75.
NgKCKePSoMK, et al. (2023) Augmenting fake content detection in online platforms: A domain adaptive transfer learning via adversarial training approach. Production and Operations Management32(7): 2101–2122.
76.
NgKCTangJLeeD (2021) The effect of platform intervention policies on fake news dissemination and survival: An empirical examination. Journal of Management Information Systems38(4): 898–930.
PennycookGRandDG (2019) Fighting misinformation on social media using crowdsourced judgments of news source quality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences116(7): 2521–2526.
81.
PennycookGRandDG (2020) Who falls for fake news? The roles of bullshit receptivity, overclaiming, familiarity, and analytic thinking. Journal of Personality88(2): 185–200.
82.
PettigrewS (2017) The racial gap in wait times: Why minority precincts are underserved by local election officials. Political Science Quarterly132(3): 527–547.
83.
PettigrewS (2021) The downstream consequences of long waits: How lines at the precinct depress future turnout. Electoral Studies71(5): 102188.
SpencerDMMarkovitsZS (2010) Long lines at polling stations? Observations from an election day field study. Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy9(1): 3–17.
90.
SteinRMMannCStewartC, et al. (2020) Waiting to vote in the 2016 presidential election: Evidence from a multi-county study. Political Research Quarterly73(2): 439–453.
91.
SteinRMVonnahmeG (2014) Polling place practices and the voting experience. In: Burden BC and Stewart CI (eds) The Measure of American Elections, pp.166–187. Cambridge University Press.
92.
StewartCAnsolabehereS (2015) Waiting to vote. Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy14(1): 47–53.
93.
StewartCI (2018) How we voted in 2016. Technical report, MIT Election Data + Science, Cambridge, MA.
94.
StewartCI (2021) How we voted in 2020. Technical report, MIT Election Data + Science, Cambridge, MA.
95.
StewartCI (2023) How we voted in 2022. Technical report, MIT Election Data + Science, Cambridge, MA.
96.
StewartCIAnsolabehereS (2013) Waiting in line to vote. Technical report, The United State Election Assistance Commission, Washington DC.
97.
SunLAbrahamS (2021) Estimating dynamic treatment effects in event studies with heterogeneous treatment effects. Journal of Econometrics225(2): 175–199.
98.
Suttmann-LeaMMerivakiT (2023) The impact of voter education on voter confidence: Evidence from the 2020 US presidential election. Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy22(2): 145–165.
99.
ThorntonLMJonesALEkpoAE, et al. (2025) A tale of two frontlines: Critically assessing the dynamics of interracial service encounters. Production and Operations Management34(3): 401–411.
100.
ÜlküSHydockCCuiS (2020) Making the wait worthwhile: Experiments on the effect of queueing on consumption. Management Science66(3): 1149–1171.
ValentinoNANeunerFG (2017) Why the sky didn’t fall: Mobilizing anger in reaction to voter ID laws. Political Psychology38(2): 331–350.
103.
VargoCJGuoLAmazeenMA (2018) The agenda-setting power of fake news: A big data analysis of the online media landscape from 2014 to 2016. New Media & Society20(5): 2028–2049.
104.
VosoughiSRoyDAralS (2018) The spread of true and false news online. Science (New York, N.Y.)359(6380): 1146–1151.
105.
WangJHongJZhouR (2018) How long did I wait? The effect of construal levels on consumers’ wait duration judgments. Journal of Consumer Research45(1): 169–184.
106.
WangXJYangMFryMJ (2015) Efficiency and equity tradeoffs in voting machine allocation problems. Journal of the Operational Research Society66(8): 1363–1369.
107.
Washington Post (2022) With the 2022 midterms ahead, expect another Latino misinformation crisis.
108.
WeeksBE (2015) Emotions, partisanship, and misperceptions: How anger and anxiety moderate the effect of partisan bias on susceptibility to political misinformation. Journal of Communication65(4): 699–719.
109.
XuJDuanLShouB, et al. (2025) Information freshness in service systems with strategic customers. Production and Operations Management34(2): 205–225.
110.
YangAKimSJKimH, et al. (2023) Who says what in which networks: What influences social media users’ emotional reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine infodemic?Social Science Computer Review41(6): 1986–2009.
111.
YangM (2024) Determine the minimum required voting resources: Response to “assessing precinct consolidation strategies through simulation optimization”. Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy23(4): 303–311.
112.
YangMAllenTTFryMJ, et al. (2013) The call for equity: Simulation optimization models to minimize the range of waiting times. IIE Transactions45(7): 781–795.
113.
YangMFryMJKeltonWD, et al. (2014) Improving voting systems through service-operations management. Production and Operations Management23(7): 1083–1097.
114.
YangMWangXJXuN (2015) A robust voting machine allocation model to reduce extreme waiting. Omega57(Part B): 230–237.
115.
YeoSKMcKasyM (2021) Emotion and humor as misinformation antidotes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences118(15): e2002484118.
116.
YuR (2016) Stress potentiates decision biases: A stress induced deliberation-to-intuition (SIDI) model. Neurobiology of Stress3: 83–95.
117.
ZannettouSCaulfieldTDe CristofaroE, et al. (2017) The web centipede: Understanding how web communities influence each other through the lens of mainstream and alternative news sources. In: Proceedings of the 2017 internet measurement conference. pp.405–417.
118.
ZhangRHanXWangR, et al. (2023) Please don’t make me wait influence of customers’ waiting preference and no-show behavior on appointment systems. Production and Operations Management32(6): 1597–1616.
119.
ZhangXDuQZhangZ (2022) A theory-driven machine learning system for financial disinformation detection. Production and Operations Management31(8): 3160–3179.
120.
ZimdarsM (2016) My “fake news list” went viral. But made-up stories are only part of the problem. The Washington Post.
Supplementary Material
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.
