An official website of the United States government
When U.S. presidential candidates misrepresent the facts, their claims get discussed across media streams, creating a lasting public impression. We show this through a public performance: the 2020 presidential debates. For every five newspaper articles related to the presidential candidates, President Donald J. Trump and Joseph R. Biden Jr., there was one mention of a misinformation-related topic advanced during the debates. Personal attacks on Biden and election integrity were the most prevalent topics across social media, newspapers, and TV. These two topics also surfaced regularly in voters’ recollections of the candidates, suggesting their impression lasted through the presidential election.
more »
« less
Information, incentives, and goals in election forecasts
Abstract Presidential elections can be forecast using information from political and economic conditions, polls, and a statistical model of changes in public opinion over time. However, these “knowns” about how to make a good presidential election forecast come with many unknowns due to the challenges of evaluating forecast calibration and communication. We highlight how incentives may shape forecasts, and particularly forecast uncertainty, in light of calibration challenges. We illustrate these challenges in creating, communicating, and evaluating election predictions, using the Economist and Fivethirtyeight forecasts of the 2020 election as examples, and offer recommendations for forecasters and scholars.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1926578
- PAR ID:
- 10392345
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Judgment and Decision Making
- Volume:
- 15
- Issue:
- 5
- ISSN:
- 1930-2975
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 863 to 880
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
We conducted a longitudinal study during the 2022 U.S. midterm elections, investigating the real-world impacts of uncertainty visualizations. Using our forecast model of the governor elections in 33 states, we created a website and deployed four uncertainty visualizations for the election forecasts: single quantile dotplot (1-Dotplot), dual quantile dotplots (2-Dotplot), dual histogram intervals (2-Interval), and Plinko quantile dotplot (Plinko), an animated design with a physical and probabilistic analogy. Our online experiment ran from Oct. 18, 2022, to Nov. 23, 2022, involving 1,327 participants from 15 states. We use Bayesian multilevel modeling and post-stratification to produce demographically-representative estimates of people's emotions, trust in forecasts, and political participation intention. We find that election forecast visualizations can heighten emotions, increase trust, and slightly affect people's intentions to participate in elections. 2-Interval shows the strongest effects across all measures; 1-Dotplot increases trust the most after elections. Both visualizations create emotional and trust gaps between different partisan identities, especially when a Republican candidate is predicted to win. Our qualitative analysis uncovers the complex political and social contexts of election forecast visualizations, showcasing that visualizations may provoke polarization. This intriguing interplay between visualization types, partisanship, and trust exemplifies the fundamental challenge of disentangling visualization from its context, underscoring a need for deeper investigation into the real-world impacts of visualizations. Our preprint and supplements are available at https://doi.org/osf.io/ajq8f .more » « less
-
Abstract With historic misses in the 2016 and 2020 US Presidential elections, interest in measuring polling errors has increased. The most common method for measuring directional errors and non-sampling excess variability during a postmortem for an election is by assessing the difference between the poll result and election result for polls conducted within a few days of the day of the election. Analysing such polling error data is notoriously difficult with typical models being extremely sensitive to the time between the poll and the election. We leverage hidden Markov models traditionally used for election forecasting to flexibly capture time-varying preferences and treat the election result as a peek at the typically hidden Markovian process. Our results are much less sensitive to the choice of time window, avoid conflating shifting preferences with polling error, and are more interpretable despite a highly flexible model. We demonstrate these results with data on polls from the 2004 through 2020 US Presidential elections and 1992 through 2020 US Senate elections, concluding that previously reported estimates of bias in Presidential elections were too extreme by 10%, estimated bias in Senatorial elections was too extreme by 25%, and excess variability estimates were also too large.more » « less
-
This data publication includes code and results from a systematic literature review on the current state of near-term forecasting of freshwater quality. The review aimed to address the following questions: (1) Freshwater variables, scales, models, and skill: Which freshwater variables and temporal scales are most commonly targeted for near-term forecasts, and what modeling methods are most commonly employed to develop these forecasts? How is the accuracy of freshwater quality forecasts assessed, and how accurate are they? How is uncertainty typically incorporated into water quality forecast output? (2) Forecast infrastructure and workflows: Are iterative, automated workflows commonly employed in near-term freshwater quality forecasting? How are forecasts validated and archived? (3) Human dimensions: What is the stated motivation for development of most near-term freshwater quality forecasts, and who are the most common end users (if any)? How are end users engaged in forecast development? An initial search was conducted for published papers presenting freshwater quality forecasts from 1 January 2017 to 17 February 2022 in the Web of Science Core Collection. Results were subsequently analyzed in three stages. First, paper titles were screened for relevance. Second, an initial screen was conducted to assess whether each paper presented a near-term freshwater quality forecast. Third, papers that passed the initial screen were analyzed using a standardized matrix to assess the state of near-term freshwater quality forecasting and identify areas of recent progress and ongoing challenges. Additional details regarding the systematic literature search and review are presented in the Methods section of the metadata.more » « less
-
Claims of election fraud throughout the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election and during the lead up to the January 6, 2021 insurrection attempt have drawn attention to the urgent need to better understand how people interpret and act on disinformation. In this work, we present three primary contributions: (1) a framework for understanding the interaction between participatory disinformation and informal and tactical mobilization; (2) three case studies from the 2020 U.S. election analyzed using detailed temporal, content, and thematic analysis; and (3) a qualitative coding scheme for understanding how digital disinformation functions to mobilize online audiences. We combine resource mobilization theory with previous work examining participatory disinformation campaigns and "deep stories" to show how false or misleading information functioned to mobilize online audiences before, during, and after election day. Our analysis highlights how users on Twitter collaboratively construct and amplify alleged evidence of fraud that is used to facilitate action, both online and off. We find that mobilization is dependent on the selective amplification of false or misleading tweets by influencers, the framing around those claims, as well as the perceived credibility of their source. These processes are a self-reinforcing cycle where audiences collaborate in the construction of a misleading version of reality, which in turn leads to offline actions that are used to further reinforce a manufactured reality. Through this work, we hope to better inform future interventions.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500007981
