Cited by 68Electoral Systems and Political ParticipationAdvanced Causal Inference TechniquesStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference

Differential Registration Bias in Voter File Data: A Sensitivity Analysis Approach

Nyhan, Brendan, Skovron, Christopher, Titiunik, Rocío·2017·American Journal of Political Science

Abstract

The widespread availability of voter files has improved the study of participation in American politics, but the lack of comprehensive data on nonregistrants creates difficult inferential issues. Most notably, observational studies that examine turnout rates among registrants often implicitly condition on registration, a posttreatment variable that can induce bias if the treatment of interest also affects the likelihood of registration. We introduce a sensitivity analysis to assess the potential bias induced by this problem, which we call differential registration bias. Our approach is most helpful for studies that estimate turnout among registrants using posttreatment registration data, but it is also valuable for studies that estimate turnout among the voting‐eligible population using secondary sources. We illustrate our approach with two studies of voting eligibility effects on subsequent turnout among young voters. In both cases, eligibility appears to decrease turnout, but these effects are found to be highly sensitive to differential registration bias.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/ajps.12288

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The ATE can be point identified if researchers collected two additional numbers: the count of total minority and white encounters, within levels of covariates X where applicable.

    “we show in Online Appendix A.6 that the ATE can be point identi fi ed if researchers collected two additional numbers: the count of total minority and white encounters, within levels of covariates X where applicable”

    From Administrative Records Mask Racially Biased Policing (2020) · cites this paper as Nyhan, Skovron, and Titiunik (2017)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nyhan, B., Skovron, C., & Titiunik, R.
Affiliations
  • Dartmouth College (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
Venue
American Journal of Political Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-01-18
Volume
61
Issue
3
Pages
744-760
ISSN
  • 0092-5853 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-5907
OpenAlex
W2574693737
Cited by
68
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2
FWCI
42.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
American Journal of Political Science (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
  • National Science Foundation (SES 1357561)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Keywords
voter files, voter turnout, sensitivity analysis, voter eligibility, young voters, voter registration

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review