Skip to main content
×
×
Home

What the Numbers Say: A Digit-Based Test for Election Fraud

  • Bernd Beber (a1) and Alexandra Scacco (a1)
Abstract

Is it possible to detect manipulation by looking only at electoral returns? Drawing on work in psychology, we exploit individuals' biases in generating numbers to highlight suspicious digit patterns in reported vote counts. First, we show that fair election procedures produce returns where last digits occur with equal frequency, but laboratory experiments indicate that individuals tend to favor some numerals over others, even when subjects have incentives to properly randomize. Second, individuals underestimate the likelihood of digit repetition in sequences of random integers, so we should observe relatively few instances of repeated numbers in manipulated vote tallies. Third, laboratory experiments demonstrate a preference for pairs of adjacent digits, which suggests that such pairs should be abundant on fraudulent return sheets. Fourth, subjects avoid pairs of distant numerals, so those should appear with lower frequency on tainted returns. We test for deviations in digit patterns using data from Sweden's 2002 parliamentary elections, Senegal's 2000 and 2007 presidential elections, and previously unavailable results from Nigeria's 2003 presidential election. In line with observers' expectations, we find substantial evidence that manipulation occurred in Nigeria as well as in Senegal in 2007.

    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      What the Numbers Say: A Digit-Based Test for Election Fraud
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      What the Numbers Say: A Digit-Based Test for Election Fraud
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      What the Numbers Say: A Digit-Based Test for Election Fraud
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
e-mail: bernd.beber@nyu.edu (corresponding author)
Footnotes
Hide All

Edited by R. Michael Alvarez

Authors' note: Supplementary materials for this article are available on the Political Analysis Web site.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
Agence France Presse. 2000. Mbeki congratulates Wade for winning Senegal election. Published March 22, 2000.
Agence France Presse. 2007. Catholic church joins critics of Nigeria poll amid fresh calls for re-run. Published April 25, 2007.
Al-Marzouki, Sanaa, Evans, Stephen, Marshall, Tom, and Roberts, Ian. 2005. Are these data real? Statistical methods for the detection of data fabrication in clinical trials. British Medical Journal 331: 267–70.
Alvarez, R. Michael, Hall, Thad E., and Hyde, Susan D., eds. 2008. Election fraud: Detecting and deterring electoral manipulation. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
Beber, Bernd, and Scacco, Alexandra. 2011. Replication data for: What the numbers say: A digit-based test for election fraud. IQSS Dataverse Network [Distributor] V1 [Version]. http://hdl.handle.net/1902.1/17151 (accessed February 25, 2012).
Boland, Philip J., and Hutchinson, Kevin. 2000. Student selection of random digits. Statistician 49: 519–29.
Budescu, David V. 1987. A Markov model for generation of random binary sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology 13: 2539.
Cantú, Francisco, and Saiegh, Sebastián M. 2011. Fraudulent democracy? An analysis of Argentina's Infamous Decade using supervised machine learning. Political Analysis 19: 409–33.
Chapanis, Alphonse. 1953. Random-number guessing behavior. American Psychologist 8: 332.
Corder, J. Kevin, and Wolbrecht, Christina. 2006. Political context and the turnout of new women voters after suffrage. Journal of Politics 68: 3449.
Deckert, Joseph, Myagkov, Mikhail, and Ordeshook, Peter C. 2011. Benford's law and the detection of election fraud. Political Analysis 19: 245–68.
Diekmann, Andreas. 2007. Not the first digit! Using Benford's law to detect fraudulent scientific data. Journal of Applied Statistics 34: 321–9.
Dlugosz, Stephan, and Müller-Funk, Ulrich. 2009. The value of the last digit: Statistical fraud detection with digit analysis. Advances in Data Analysis and Classification 3: 281–90.
ECOWAS. 2007a. ECOWAS electoral observers in Senegal. Press release 11/2007, February 25, 2007.
ECOWAS. 2007b. ECOWAS observers endorse presidential election in Senegal. Press release 13/2007, February 27, 2007.
European Union Election Observation Mission. 2003. Nigeria 2003: Final report on the national assembly, presidential, gubernatorial, and state houses of assembly elections. http://ec.europa.eu/external_relations/human_rights/eu_election_ass_observ/nigeria/rep03.pdf (accessed March 20, 2008).
Ichino, Nahomi, and Schündeln, Matthias. 2011. Deterring or displacing electoral irregularities? Spillover effects of observers in a randomized field experiment in Ghana. Working paper.
Kevles, Daniel J. 1998. The Baltimore case: A trial of politics, science, and character. New York: W. W. Norton.
Kew, Darren. 1999. Democrazy: Dem go craze, O: Monitoring the 1999 elections. Issue: A Journal of Opinion 27: 2933.
Kew, Darren. 2004. The 2003 elections: Hardly credible, but acceptable. In Crafting the new Nigeria: Confronting the challenges, ed. Rotberg, Robert I., 139–73. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
Kuhl, J., and Schönpflug, W. 1974. Ordnungsverhalten, Lärmbelastung, und Persönlichkeit. Psychological Research 37: 143–76.
Levin, Ines, Cohn, Gabe, Michael Alvarez, R., and Ordeshook, Peter C. 2009. Detecting voter fraud in an electronic voting context: An analysis of the unlimited reelection vote in Venezuela. Online Proceedings of the Electronic Voting Technology Workshop.
Mebane, Walter R. Jr. 2006. Election forensics: Vote counts and Benford's law. Working paper.
Mebane, Walter R. Jr. 2008. Election forensics: The second-digit Benford law's test and recent American presidential elections. In Election fraud: Detecting and deterring electoral manipulation, eds. Michal Alvarez, R., Hall, Thad E., Hyde, Susan D., 162–81. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
Mebane, Walter R. Jr. 2011. Comment on “Benford's law and the detection of election fraud.” Political Analysis 19: 269–72.
Mebane, Walter R. Jr., and Sekhon, Jasjeet S. 2004. Robust estimation and outlier detection for overdispersed multinomial models of count data. American Journal of Political Science 48: 392411.
Mosimann, James E., and Ratnaparkhi, Makarand V. 1996. Uniform occurrence of digits for folded and mixture distributions on finite intervals. Communications in Statistics—Simulation and Computation 25: 481506.
Mosimann, James E., Wiseman, Claire V., and Edelman, Ruth E. 1995. Data fabrication: Can people generate random digits? Accountability in Research 4: 3155.
Mosimann, James E., Dahlberg, John E., Davidian, Nancy M., and Krueger, John W. 2002. Terminal digits and the examination of questioned data. Accountability in Research 9: 7592.
Myagkov, Mikhail, Ordeshook, Peter C., and Shakin, Dimitry. 2005. Fraud or fairytales: Russia and Ukraine's electoral experience. Post-Soviet Affairs 21: 91131.
Myagkov, Misha, Ordeshook, Peter C., and Shakin, Dimitri. 2007. The disappearance of fraud: The forensics of Ukraine's 2006 parliamentary elections. Post-Soviet Affairs 23: 218–39.
Myagkov, Mikhail, Ordeshook, Peter C., and Shakin, Dimitri, eds. 2009. The forensics of election fraud: Russia and Ukraine. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Nickerson, Raymond S. 2002. Perception and production of randomness. Psychological Review 109: 330–57.
Nigrini, Mark J. 1999. I've got your number: How a mathematical phenomenon can help CPAs uncover fraud and other irregularities. Journal of Accountancy 187: 7983.
Preece, D. A. 1981. Distributions of final digits in data. Statistician 30: 3160.
Rapoport, Amnon, and Budescu, David V. 1997. Randomization in individual choice behavior. Psychological Review 104: 603–17.
Rath, Gustave J. 1966. Randomization by humans. American Journal of Psychology 79: 97103.
Reuters News. 2007a. Senegal court confirms Wade reelected president. Published March 11, 2007.
Reuters News. 2007b. Wade party wins Senegal poll: Foes threaten protest. Published June 7, 2007.
Schäfer, Christin, Schräpler, Jörg-Peter, Müller, Klaus-Robert, and Wagner, Gert. 2004. Automatic identification of faked and fraudulent interviews by two different methods. German Institute for Economic Research Discussion Paper.
Smith, Jane, and Godlee, Fiona. 2005. Investigating allegations of scientific misconduct: Journals can only do so much; institutions need to be willing to investigate. British Medical Journal 331: 245–6.
The Economist. 2007. Nigeria: How to steal an election. Published April 18, 2007. http://www.economist.com/node/9032254 (accessed July 31, 2011).
Tversky, Amos, and Kahneman, Daniel. 1972. Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology 3: 430–54.
United Nations Development Programme. 2007. Human Development Report 2007/2008. http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/HDR_20072008_EN_Complete.pdf (accessed July 31, 2011).
Wand, Jonathan N., Shotts, Kenneth W., Sekhon, Jasjeet S., Mebane, Walter R. Jr., Herron, Michael C., and Brady, Henry E. 2001. The butterfly did it: The aberrant vote for Buchanan in Palm Beach County, Florida. American Political Science Review 95: 793810.
Watrin, Christoph, Struffert, Ralf, and Ullmann, Robert. 2008. Benford's law: An instrument for selecting tax audit targets? Review of Managerial Science 2: 219–37.
White, Caroline. 2005. Suspected research fraud: Difficulties of getting at the truth. British Medical Journal 331: 245–6.
World Bank. 2011. World development indicators. http://databank.worldbank.org (accessed July 31, 2011).
Yule, G. Udny. 1927. On reading a scale. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 90: 570–87.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Political Analysis
  • ISSN: 1047-1987
  • EISSN: 1476-4989
  • URL: /core/journals/political-analysis
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×
MathJax
Type Description Title
PDF
Supplementary materials

Beber and Scacco supplementary material
Appendix D

 PDF (39 KB)
39 KB
PDF
Supplementary materials

Beber and Scacco supplementary material
Appendix C

 PDF (221 KB)
221 KB
PDF
Supplementary materials

Beber and Scacco supplementary material
Appendix A

 PDF (45 KB)
45 KB
PDF
Supplementary materials

Beber and Scacco supplementary material
Appendix B

 PDF (37 KB)
37 KB
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Beber and Scacco supplementary material
Supplementary Material

 Unknown (31.7 MB)
31.7 MB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed