|
Field
Abstract
|
Before
During the mid 2010s, counties in Utah began to switch to universal vote by mail. By 2016, 21 out of 29 of Utah’s counties sent all their residents mail in ballots that they could return by mail or via drop box. In 2019, the entire state had moved to universal vote by mail. In 2025, however, the Utah State Legislature enacted HB300 that required the state to switch the default option back to in-person voting after the 2028 election. In the meantime, every registered Utah voter needs to sign into a complicated state website, navigate the voter registration form, and (after re-registering) indicate if they would like to continue to receive a by-mail ballot or stop their by-mail ballot and vote in person. If a voter does not complete the process, then their mail ballot will automatically be stopped, and the voter will need to vote in-person.
The legislation also requires that the county clerks provide an informational insert with every ballot to inform voters about the change. We presented county clerks in Utah with the opportunity to participate in a randomized controlled trial in which we would help design three different versions of the informational insert that would have varying administrative burden and choice friction. The status quo option included information that the voter needed to make an active choice before the 2029 election to continue receiving their ballot by mail and included the URL for the state website where they could indicate their preference themselves. A second option had the same informational text plus a QR code that led to the same website. The third option had the same informational text but included a check box choice that allows the voter to indicate their preference to the county clerk's office directly, where the clerk's office would do all the work of registering their choice. Unnecessary complexity in decision-making can deter individuals from making a utility maximizing choice that they even claim they want to make, so we theorized that voters who receive the check box inserts would register their ballot method decision at a higher rate than voters in the other two treatments.
|
After
During the mid 2010s, counties in Utah began to switch to universal vote by mail. By 2016, 21 out of 29 of Utah’s counties sent all their residents mail in ballots that they could return by mail or via drop box. In 2019, the entire state had moved to universal vote by mail. In 2025, the Utah State Legislature enacted HB300 that required every registered Utah voter to make an active choice of their preferred voter method: by mail or in-person. To make this choice a voter would need to sign into a state website, navigate the voter registration form, and (after re-registering) indicate if they would like to continue to receive a by-mail ballot or stop their by-mail ballot and vote in person. If a voter does not complete the process before the 2028 election, then their in-person ballot will automatically be stopped, and the voter will need to vote in-person.
The legislation also requires that the county clerks provide an informational insert with every ballot to inform voters about the change. The Utah Office of the Lieutenant Governor (LGO), at the request of and in conjunction with individual county clerks, requested that the research team help design the informational insert (for counties who volunteered to participate) to better understand how to use behavioral economics principles to overcome the administrative burden and help voters make an active choice regarding their voter method. The Utah LGO facilitated the clerks' request that the research team contribute to informational inserts distributed by law to voters as part of HB300.
The research team worked with participating county clerks individually to tailor each insert to the county's specific needs. County insert designs followed the same broad template: a common information section followed by the treatment, which was one of a text link, a QR code, or a returnable check box. The insert was delivered to each voter with their mail-in ballot. Complexity in decision-making can deter individuals from making a utility maximizing choice that they even claim they want to make, so we theorized that voters who receive the check box inserts would register their ballot method decision at a higher rate than voters in the other two treatments.
|
|
Field
Last Published
|
Before
September 21, 2026 09:05 AM
|
After
September 21, 2026 11:49 AM
|
|
Field
Intervention (Public)
|
Before
By law, the county clerks need to provide an insert to each voter and will be administering the three potential versions. We proposed three different versions of the informational insert that would have varying administrative burden and choice friction. The status quo option includes information that the voter needed to make an active choice before the 2029 election to continue receiving their ballot by mail and included the url for the state website to logon and indicate their preference. A second option had the same informational text plus a QR code that the voter can scan to get to the voter portal. The third option had the same informational text but includes a checked box that allows the voter to indicate their preference. The voter can then return the check box with their ballot and the county clerk will do all the work for them in the state system. The third option essentially shifts the administrative burden back to the county clerk and removes the decision friction.
|
After
By law, the county clerks need to provide an insert to each voter and will be administering the three potential versions. All three insert designs include information that the voter needed to make an active choice before the 2029 election if they wanted to continue receiving their ballot by mail. The first design included the URL for the state website to logon and indicate their preference. The second design had a QR code that the voter can scan to get to the same voter portal. The third design included a check box that allows the voter to indicate their preference without logging in to the state website. The third option essentially removes the decision friction caused by needing to log in to the state website.
|
|
Field
Experimental Design (Public)
|
Before
The Utah Lieutenant Governor’s Office (LGO) requested that the research team help design the informational insert to better understand how to use behavioral economics principles to overcome the administrative burden and help voters make an active choice for their voter method. We proposed three different versions of the informational insert that would have varying administrative burden and choice friction. The status quo option includes information that the voter needed to make an active choice before the 2029 election to continue receiving their ballot by mail and included the url for the state website to logon and indicate their preference. A second option had the same informational text plus a QR code that the voter can scan to get to the voter portal. The third option had the same informational text but includes a checked box that allows the voter to indicate their preference. The voter can then return the check box with their ballot and the county clerk will do all the work for them in the state system. The third option essentially shifts the administrative burden back to the county clerk and removes the decision friction.
The county clerks from five counties have agreed to randomize receipt of one of the three versions on the voting precinct level. By law, the county clerks need to provide an insert to each voter and will be administering the three potential versions. The county clerks will be conducting the randomization (with some input from the research team) but the research team will have no contact with voters not have any part in the processing of ballots or updating the voter method preferences. Following the election, the Lieutenant Governor's Office will transmit de-identified data on the choices voters made to the research team.
|
After
By law, the county clerks need to provide an insert to each voter and will be administering the three potential versions. All three insert designs include information that the voter needed to make an active choice before the 2029 election if they wanted to continue receiving their ballot by mail. The first design included the URL for the state website to logon and indicate their preference. The second design had a QR code that the voter can scan to get to the same voter portal. The third design included a check box that allows the voter to indicate their preference without logging in to the state website. The third option essentially removes the decision friction caused by needing to log in to the state website.
The county clerks from five counties agreed to randomize receipt of one of the three versions on the voting precinct level. By law, the county clerks need to provide an insert to each voter and will be administering the three potential versions. County clerks provided lists of voting precincts in their counties sorted by active voter count. The research team block randomized voting precincts within counties such that the three most populous districts each receive a different treatment, then the next three most populous, and so on. This randomization was done on a replicable random number generator seed in Stata, and precinct treatment assignments will persist from primary elections to the later general election if counties continue to participate.
|