Abstract
As dissatisfaction with U.S. democracy rises, ranked-choice voting (RCV) has gained prominence as a reform intended to improve fairness and representation. Critics argue, however, that RCV confuses voters and runs the risk of undermining confidence in elections. This study examined how a range of ranked-choice voting ballots perform relative to single-choice ballots across usability and democratic satisfaction measures, while assessing RCV’s potential to reduce polarization and strengthen outcome legitimacy. With a between-subjects online survey design, we asked eligible U.S. voters to participate in a simulated but realistic presidential election, randomly assigning them to either a single-choice ballot or one of five RCV ballots varying in layout and instructional depth (grid, video-grid, hand-rank, optic scan or low instruction grid). Participants subsequently evaluated - among other things - usability, perceptions of fairness, satisfaction outcomes, trust and acceptance of the outcome and perceived democratic quality. While RCV ballots were viewed as less simple, they were not more confusing to complete than their single-choice counterparts and did not meaningfully reduce confidence in electoral accuracy. Across multiple formats, RCV ballots significantly increased user perceptions that election outcomes reflected voter preferences. Positive effects were strongest among voters with prior exposure to RCV and those with strongly negative party sentiments, suggesting familiarity and political alienation might amplify RCV’s perceived democratic benefits.