On the Legitimacy of Voting Methods

Abstract

In a functioning democracy, the legitimacy of government rests on citizens' confidence in the political system and its decisions. The ability to express preferences and consider these preferences in decision-making is a critical aspect of democracy. This study investigates the impact of voting rules on the perception of legitimacy in a democratic government.

Using a human subject experiment, 120 participants cast their votes using four voting methods: Majority voting, Combined Approval Voting, Score Voting, and modified Borda Count. The experiment was conducted in two contexts: a non-consequential setting (voting on color) and a real-world context (voting on COVID-19-related questions).

The results suggest that the perceived legitimacy of voting methods is context-dependent. In crucial societal contexts such as COVID-19, more flexible voting methods were preferred, while in non-consequential contexts, simple methods like majority voting were favored. The study also identified a correlation between voter traits and legitimacy ratings, with consistent voters preferring more complex methods and inconsistent voters favoring straightforward methods. However, voters' views on COVID-19-related issues did not affect their legitimacy ratings.

This study sheds new light on how voters perceive the legitimacy of different voting methods and provides valuable information for policymakers to make better informed decisions about the methods they use. The findings of this study are of significant interest to the academic community and policymakers concerned with the legitimacy and stability of democratic institutions.

Keywords: Social choice theory, Democracy, Legitimacy, Voting rules, Human subject experiment, COVID-19

JEL Classification: C45, D70, D71, D78, P16