The Role of Electoral Fraud and Winning–Losing for Mass Affective Polarization: Cross-National Evidence

This study investigates the impact of electoral fraud and election outcomes on mass affective polarization across 149 elections in 48 countries from 1996 to 2020. By analyzing citizens’ assessments of political parties using a like–dislike scale from the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems and electoral integrity scores from the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (Tufis and Hudson, 2022), this research reveals that manipulative electoral strategies directly contribute to increased mass affective polarization. These findings remain consistent when using alternative measurements of electoral integrity offered by Perceptions of Electoral Integrity data (Garnett et al., 2022). In addition, this study identifies that winning–losing status (i.e., whether an individual voted for the winning party in the previous election) plays a role in amplifying mass affective polarization. I posit that those who voted for the losing party may reconcile their support for the losing party by forming stronger associations with other political parties compared with supporters of the winning party. Furthermore, the research uncovers that the relationship between low electoral integrity and heightened affective polarization is more pronounced among individuals who voted for the winning party. These findings have significant implications for our understanding of mass polarization, democratic legitimacy, and winner–loser status.

• Publication year

  2025

• Venue

  Election Law Journal

• Publication date

  2025-04-22

• Fields of study

  Not labeled

• Identifiers
  DOI 10.1089/elj.2024.0014
• External record

  Open on Semantic Scholar

• Source metadata

  Semantic Scholar

• No claims are published for this paper.

• No concepts are published for this paper.

• Camps, not just parties. The dynamic foundations of affective polarization in multi-party systems

  2023cited by this paper
• Radical American Partisanship

  2022cited by this paper
• Who Dislikes Whom? Affective Polarization between Pairs of Parties in Western Democracies

  2022cited by this paper
• Social and Cognitive Aspects of the Vulnerability to Political Misinformation

  2021cited by this paper
• Who are the victims of electoral fraud in Great Britain? Evidence from survey research

  2021cited by this paper
• Electoral Manipulation and Regime Support: Survey Evidence from Russia

  2021cited by this paper
• Fragmented foes: Affective polarization in the multiparty context of the Netherlands

  2021cited by this paper
• The echo chamber effect on social media

  2021cited by this paper
• Democracy in America? Partisanship, Polarization, and the Robustness of Support for Democracy in the United States

  2020cited by this paper
• Affective polarization in multiparty systems

  2020cited by this paper
• Affective polarization and the salience of elections

  2020cited by this paper
• Electoral integrity – The winner takes it all? Evidence from three British general elections

  2020cited by this paper
• United we stand, divided we rule: how political polarization erodes democracy

  2020cited by this paper
• Party System Polarization, Citizenship, and Immigrant Party Allegiances in Western Europe

  2020cited by this paper
• Partisan cues and internet memes: early evidence for motivated skepticism in audience message processing of spreadable political media

  2020cited by this paper
• The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States

  2019cited by this paper
• Toward a Theory of Pernicious Polarization and How It Harms Democracies: Comparative Evidence and Possible Remedies

  2019cited by this paper
• How Ideology , Economics and Institutions Shape Affective Polarization in Democratic Polities

  2019cited by this paper
• What do voters do when they prefer a leader from another party?

  2019cited by this paper
• Polarization versus Democracy

  2019cited by this paper
• Polarization and correct voting in U.S. presidential elections

  2019cited by this paper
• How partisan affect shapes citizens' perception of the political world

  2019cited by this paper
• Electoral fraud and voter turnout: An experimental study

  2019cited by this paper
• Mass Partisan Polarization: Measuring a Relational Concept

  2018cited by this paper
• The Differential Effects of Actual and Perceived Polarization

  2018cited by this paper
• Türkiye’de Seçim Bütünlüğü ve Seçim Gözlemi

  2018cited by this paper
• What makes people believe that their party won the election?

  2018cited by this paper
• Dial ‘F’ for fraud: Explaining citizens suspicions about elections

  2018cited by this paper
• Explaining electoral fraud in an advanced democracy: Fraud vulnerabilities, opportunities and facilitating mechanisms in British elections

  2017cited by this paper
• The costs of electoral fraud: establishing the link between electoral integrity, winning an election, and satisfaction with democracy

  2017cited by this paper
• Beyond Misinformation: Understanding and coping with the post-truth era

  2017cited by this paper
• Electoral governance in Latin America and the behaviour of oppositions 1

  2017cited by this paper
• Strategies of Actors Influencing Electoral Integrity: A Case Study of the Czech Republic

  2017cited by this paper
• The Ideological Foundations of Affective Polarization in the U.S. Electorate

  2017cited by this paper
• The Standardized World Income Inequality Database

  2016cited by this paper
• Who is responsible for economic failures? Self-serving bias and fundamental attribution error in political context

  2016cited by this paper
• A Cross-Cutting Calm How Social Sorting Drives Affective Polarization

  2016cited by this paper
• How Ideology Fuels Affective Polarization

  2016cited by this paper
• Election administration and perceptions of fair elections

  2015cited by this paper
• Fear and Loathing across Party Lines: New Evidence on Group Polarization

  2015cited by this paper
• Why People “Don’t Trust the Evidence”

  2015cited by this paper
• Party Polarization and Mass Partisanship: A Comparative Perspective

  2015cited by this paper
• Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook

  2015cited by this paper
• A systematic approach to study electoral fraud

  2014cited by this paper
• Affective Contagion in Effortful Political Thinking

  2014cited by this paper
• Why Electoral Integrity Matters

  2014cited by this paper
• The contingent effect of institutions: Electoral formulas, ethnic polarization, and election quality

  2014cited by this paper
• Electoral Trust in Latin America

  2014cited by this paper
• Methods and Evidence

  2014cited by this paper
• Why Governments and Parties Manipulate Elections: Theory, Practice, and Implications

  2013influential reference
• Trust in elections, vote buying, and turnout in Latin America

  2013cited by this paper
• The Crisis in American Democracy

  2013cited by this paper
• Does the world agree about standards of electoral integrity? Evidence for the diffusion of global norms

  2013cited by this paper
• Affect, Not Ideology A Social Identity Perspective on Polarization

  2012cited by this paper
• Are there global norms and universal standards of electoral integrity and malpractice? Comparing public and expert perceptions

  2012cited by this paper
• Electoral malpractice

  2012cited by this paper
• Partisan Moods: Polarization and the Dynamics of Mass Party Preferences

  2012cited by this paper
• Winning and Competitiveness as Determinants of Political Support

  2011cited by this paper
• Trust in elections and the institutional design of electoral authorities: Evidence from Latin America

  2010cited by this paper
• Election Fraud: Detecting and Deterring Electoral Manipulation

  2009cited by this paper
• Narrowing the Legitimacy Gap: Turnovers as a Cause of Democratic Consolidation

  2009cited by this paper
• The Quantity and the Quality of Party Systems

  2008cited by this paper
• Vote Fraud in the Eye of the Beholder: The Role of Public Opinion in the Challenge to Voter Identification Requirements

  2008cited by this paper
• Who Cheats? Who Loots? Political Competition and Corruption in Japan, 1947–1993

  2008cited by this paper
• Electoral institutions and popular confidence in electoral processes: A cross-national analysis

  2008cited by this paper
• Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs

  2006influential reference
• How do people react to negative procedures? On the moderating role of authority’s biased attitudes ☆

  2006cited by this paper
• A fundamental attribution error? Rethinking cognitive distortions †

  2006cited by this paper
• Fair Procedures: Evidence from Games Involving Lotteries*

  2005cited by this paper
• A framework for the systematic study of election quality

  2005cited by this paper
• Losers' Consent: Elections and Democratic Legitimacy

  2005influential reference
• Social Desirability and Response Validity: A Comparative Analysis of Overreporting Voter Turnout in Five Countries

  2005cited by this paper
• A criterion validity test of the contingent valuation method: comparing hypothetical and actual voting behavior for a public referendum

  2003cited by this paper
• Germany: The Mixed‐Member System as a Political Compromise

  2003cited by this paper
• ELECTORAL FRAUD: Causes, Types, and Consequences

  2003cited by this paper
• The Nested Game of Democratization by Elections

  2002cited by this paper
• The Law of Group Polarization

  2002cited by this paper
• Elections Without Democracy: The Menu of Manipulation

  2002influential reference
• Referent cognitions theory: the role of closeness of reference points in the psychology of voice.

  2001cited by this paper
• The Political Impact of Electoral System Change in Japan and New Zealand, 1996

  1998cited by this paper
• Mexicans React to Electoral Fraud and Political Corruption: an Assessment of Public Opinion and Voting Behavior

  1998cited by this paper
• The thrill of victory, the complexity of defeat: self-esteem and people's emotional reactions to success and failure.

  1995cited by this paper
• The Perception of Ideological Distance

  1992cited by this paper
• Motivated Skepticism: Use of Differential Decision Criteria for Preferred and Nonpreferred Conclusions

  1992cited by this paper
• How mental systems believe.

  1991cited by this paper
• Proportionality, disproportionality and electoral systems

  1991cited by this paper
• The case for motivated reasoning.

  1990cited by this paper
• Transitions from Authoritarian Rule: Tentative Conclusions about Uncertain Democracies

  1990cited by this paper
• Outcome bias in decision evaluation.

  1988cited by this paper
• An attributional analysis of excuse giving: studies of a naive theory of emotion.

  1987cited by this paper
• Judgment under uncertainty: Shortcomings in the attribution process: On the origins and maintenance of erroneous social assessments

  1982cited by this paper
• An integrative theory of intergroup conflict.

  1979cited by this paper
• The cognition–emotion process in achievement-related contexts.

  1979cited by this paper
• “Effective” Number of Parties

  1979cited by this paper
• Causes and reasons in attribution theory: A conceptual critique.

  1978cited by this paper
• Conflict Reduction in the Post-Election Period: a Test of the Depolarization Thesis

  1977influential reference
• Social categorization and similarity in intergroup behaviour

  1973cited by this paper
• Experiments in intergroup discrimination.

  1970cited by this paper
• A Preface to Democratic Theory

  1957cited by this paper

• No citing papers are available for this paper.