Face-Saving Responses Reduce Turnout Overreporting... But Not Always By Much

Post-election surveys often overestimate voter turnout rates due to face-saving response biases among abstainers, especially in contexts like Europe and Canada. This study tests how effective offering these respondents a 'face-saving' option is across diverse political settings.

The Face-Saving Solution:

Researchers have found that presenting abstainers with specific justifications for not voting can significantly reduce overreporting of turnout rates (by 4-8 percentage points). This approach builds on earlier survey experiments conducted in the U.S., but its effectiveness may depend on the cultural context.

Across Diverse Contexts:

To explore this, we analyzed wording experiments embedded across 19 post-election surveys covering various electoral levels—national elections, provincial/state contests, regional referendums, and municipal polls—in European nations and Canada. This represents a broader range of contexts than previous studies.

Our Findings:

Electoral turnout reporting varies considerably depending on the specific face-saving options offered and the country context. Effect sizes ranged from no change to reductions as low as 18 percentage points in some cases, highlighting both the potential utility and limitations of this approach for improving survey accuracy.

Why This Matters:

This research demonstrates that while a common solution exists for addressing turnout reporting bias, its effectiveness is not universal across different political contexts. Survey designers must carefully consider how to implement face-saving options effectively.