Percentage-Based versus Statistical-Power-Based Vote Tabulation Audits

Citation data:

The American Statistician, ISSN: 0003-1305, Vol: 62, Issue: 1, Page: 11-16

Publication Year:
2008
Usage 1650
Abstract Views 1645
Link-outs 5
Captures 16
Exports-Saves 13
Readers 3
Citations 8
Citation Indexes 8
Repository URL:
https://works.bepress.com/arlene_ash/10; https://escholarship.umassmed.edu/qhs_pp/749
DOI:
10.1198/000313008x273779; 10.1198/000313008x273779.
Author(s):
McCarthy, John; Stanislevic, Howard; Lindeman, Mark; Ash, Arlene S.; Addona, Vittorio; Batcher, Mary
Publisher(s):
Informa UK Limited
Tags:
Mathematics; Decision Sciences; Biostatistics; Epidemiology; Health Services Research; Statistics and Probability
article description
Several pending federal and state electoral-integrity bills specify hand audits of 1% to 10% of all precincts. However, percentage-based audits are usually inefficient, because they require large samples for large jurisdictions, even though the sample needed to achieve good accuracy is much more affected by the closeness of the contest than population size. Percentage-based audits can also be ineffective, since close contests may require auditing a large fraction of the total to provide confidence in the outcome. We present a plausible statistical framework that we have used in advising state and local election officials and legislators. In recent federal elections, this audit model would have required approximately the same effort and resources as the less effective percentage-based audits now being considered. ©2008 American Statistical Association.