E-Vote Your Conscience: Perceptions of Coercion and Vote Buying, and the Usability of Fake Credentials in Online Voting

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2404.12075v1
• Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 10:57:32 GMT
• Title: E-Vote Your Conscience: Perceptions of Coercion and Vote Buying, and the Usability of Fake Credentials in Online Voting
• Authors: Louis-Henri Merino, Alaleh Azhir, Haoqian Zhang, Simone Colombo, Bernhard Tellenbach, Vero Estrada-Galiñanes, Bryan Ford,
• Abstract summary: Online voting is more susceptible to voter coercion and vote buying than in-person voting. One mitigation is to give voters fake voting credentials that they can yield to a coercer. Fake credentials appear identical to real ones, but cast votes that are silently omitted from the final tally.
• Score: 1.0721573281744934
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Online voting is attractive for convenience and accessibility, but is more susceptible to voter coercion and vote buying than in-person voting. One mitigation is to give voters fake voting credentials that they can yield to a coercer. Fake credentials appear identical to real ones, but cast votes that are silently omitted from the final tally. An important unanswered question is how ordinary voters perceive such a mitigation: whether they could understand and use fake credentials, and whether the coercion risks justify the costs of mitigation. We present the first systematic study of these questions, involving 150 diverse individuals in Boston, Massachusetts. All participants "registered" and "voted" in a mock election: 120 were exposed to coercion resistance via fake credentials, the rest forming a control group. Of the 120 participants exposed to fake credentials, 96% understood their use. 53% reported that they would create fake credentials in a real-world voting scenario, given the opportunity. 10% mistakenly voted with a fake credential, however. 22% reported either personal experience with or direct knowledge of coercion or vote-buying incidents. These latter participants rated the coercion-resistant system essentially as trustworthy as in-person voting via hand-marked paper ballots. Of the 150 total participants to use the system, 87% successfully created their credentials without assistance; 83% both successfully created and properly used their credentials. Participants give a System Usability Scale score of 70.4, which is slightly above the industry's average score of 68. Our findings appear to support the importance of the coercion problem in general, and the promise of fake credentials as a possible mitigation, but user error rates remain an important usability challenge for future work.

Related papers

• Improving the Computational Efficiency of Adaptive Audits of IRV Elections [54.427049258408424]
  AWAIRE can audit IRV contests with any number of candidates, but the original implementation incurred memory and computation costs that grew superexponentially with the number of candidates. This paper improves the algorithmic implementation of AWAIRE in three ways that make it practical to audit IRV contests with 55 candidates, compared to the previous 6 candidates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-23T13:28:00Z)
• Intelligo ut Confido: Understanding, Trust and User Experience in Verifiable Receipt-Free E-Voting (long version) [1.306972554821087]
  We present a study with 300 participants which aims to evaluate the voters' experience of the receipt-freeness procedures in the e-voting protocol Selene. While the usability and trust factors were rated low in the experiments, we found a positive correlation between trust and understanding.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-18T07:49:39Z)
• Publicly auditable privacy-preserving electoral rolls [0.32498796510544625]
  We study the problem of designing publicly auditable yet privacy-preserving electoral rolls. The audit can detect polling-day ballot stuffing and denials to eligible voters by malicious polling officers. The entire electoral roll is never revealed, which prevents any large-scale systematic voter targeting and manipulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-18T13:11:48Z)
• The Decisive Power of Indecision: Low-Variance Risk-Limiting Audits and Election Contestation via Marginal Mark Recording [51.82772358241505]
  Risk-limiting audits (RLAs) are techniques for verifying the outcomes of large elections. We define new families of audits that improve efficiency and offer advances in statistical power. New audits are enabled by revisiting the standard notion of a cast-vote record so that it can declare multiple possible mark interpretations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-09T16:23:54Z)
• Learning to Manipulate under Limited Information [44.99833362998488]
  We trained over 70,000 neural networks of 26 sizes to manipulate against 8 different voting methods. We find that some voting methods, such as Borda, are highly manipulable by networks with limited information, while others, such as Instant Runoff, are not.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-29T18:49:50Z)
• Adaptively Weighted Audits of Instant-Runoff Voting Elections: AWAIRE [61.872917066847855]
  Methods for auditing instant-runoff voting (IRV) elections are either not risk-limiting or require cast vote records (CVRs), the voting system's electronic record of the votes on each ballot. We develop an RLA method that uses adaptively weighted averages of test supermartingales to efficiently audit IRV elections when CVRs are not available.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-20T15:55:34Z)
• Candidate Incentive Distributions: How voting methods shape electoral incentives [0.0]
  We find that Instant Runoff Voting incentivizes candidates to appeal to a wider range of voters than Plurality Voting. We find that Condorcet methods and STAR (Score Then Automatic Runoff) Voting provide the most balanced incentives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-12T14:32:46Z)
• Fake News Detection Using Majority Voting Technique [0.0]
  We have proposed majority voting approach to detect fake news articles. We have used publicly available fake news dataset, comprising of 20,800 news articles among which 10,387 are real and 10,413 are fake news labeled as binary 0 and 1. The experimental results show that, our proposed approach achieved accuracy of 96.38%, precision of 96%, recall of 96% and F1-measure of 96%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-18T13:24:03Z)
• TRIP: Trust-Limited Coercion-Resistant In-Person Voter Registration [1.0244919633049518]
  One promising mitigation strategy enables voters to give a coercer fake voting credentials, which silently cast votes that do not count. We present TRIP, the first voter registration scheme that addresses these challenges by leveraging the physical security of in-person interaction. Voters use a kiosk in a privacy booth to print real and fake paper credentials, which appear indistinguishable to others. For verifiability, each credential includes an interactive zero-knowledge proof, which is sound in real credentials and unsound in fake credentials.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-14T13:35:46Z)
• Causal Understanding of Fake News Dissemination on Social Media [50.4854427067898]
  We argue that it is critical to understand what user attributes potentially cause users to share fake news. In fake news dissemination, confounders can be characterized by fake news sharing behavior that inherently relates to user attributes and online activities. We propose a principled approach to alleviating selection bias in fake news dissemination.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-20T19:37:04Z)
• Keystroke Biometrics in Response to Fake News Propagation in a Global Pandemic [77.79066811371978]
  This work proposes and analyzes the use of keystroke biometrics for content de-anonymization. Fake news have become a powerful tool to manipulate public opinion, especially during major events.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-15T17:56:11Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.