It feels like the air in America is always buzzing with political talk, especially now as midterm primaries get started. We’re all watching to see which way the wind blows, wondering who will control Congress. But there’s a shadow hanging over it all: the persistent whispers and outright shouts from the current administration, echoing claims of election fraud – claims that, frankly, have been pulled apart and shown to be false time and time again. It’s a bit disheartening, really, because this isn’t a new problem. Even before our political landscape got as rocky as it is today, doubts about fair elections were bubbling under the surface. It makes you wonder, what is it about these fraud claims that makes them stick, and is there anything we can do to clear the air and help people trust the process again?
Turns out, researchers have been digging into this very question. They’ve looked at how surprising election outcomes affect whether people start to suspect fraud. Imagine a race where everyone expects one person to win, and then, boom, someone completely different takes it. Does that sudden twist make everyone, winners and losers alike, start questioning if the whole thing was on the up and up? Interestingly, a study spanning elections from 1996 to 2020 found that, for the most part, a surprise winner didn’t totally tank voter trust. People generally took it in stride. But then came 2020, and everything changed. When Joe Biden won against Donald Trump, it wasn’t just Trump supporters who felt a jolt of distrust. Even some independents and folks who voted for Biden started to have doubts about the vote-counting process. It was like a thick fog of suspicion rolled in, and it didn’t just settle over one group; it seeped into the general public’s perception. It suggests that the “rigged election” story, repeated so often, really did a number on everyone’s confidence, not just those who were already inclined to believe it. It’s a sobering thought, isn’t it, to think that shared trust can be so easily eroded?
So, what fueled this particular fire of suspicion in 2020? The researcher points to something called the “expectancy-disconfirmation model.” It’s a fancy way of saying we get thrown off when things don’t go as we expect them to. Think about it: if you’re expecting rain all day and the sun is shining, there’s a little mental recalibration that has to happen. Now, imagine that gap between expectation and reality is huge, like a chasm. That’s when things get truly unsettling. In 2020, what made it different, the research suggests, wasn’t just a regular surprise. It was the constant, deliberate drumming of a “fraud narrative” both before and after the election. Donald Trump, the candidate, essentially set up a no-lose scenario for himself and a no-win for truth. He told people he was going to win big, and that if his opponent, Joe Biden, won, it had to mean the system was rigged. This clever, but ultimately destructive, framing meant that almost any result could be twisted to confirm the conspiracy. This is precisely why we can’t just sit back and react to these narratives. We need to be proactive, using what we know about how people think and feel to set accurate expectations before the results are even known. It’s about building a sturdy foundation of understanding, so misinformation doesn’t have as much room to take root.
This brings us to the exciting part: how we can use psychology to not just understand these tricky situations, but to actually fix them. Psychological science can lay bare why unexpected outcomes feel so jarring, but it can also show us how to manage those expectations and, hopefully, stitch trust back into the fabric of our electoral process. Let’s take a common example that often throws people for a loop: election night. Many of us, myself included, grew up with the idea that by the time you go to bed on election night, you’ll know who won. But the reality is often very different! Elections are frequently not “over” on election night. And this is where social psychology can step in to combat the misinformation that sprouts from this false expectation. We can leverage the power of social norms – those unwritten rules and shared understandings that guide our behavior – to help people grasp that finishing the vote count by midnight isn’t always feasible. In many states, they can’t even start counting absentee ballots until Election Day itself. And with so many people voting early these days, that’s a massive pile of ballots to get through. It simply takes time, and there’s nothing nefarious about it.
Years ago, a wonderful organization called the Center for Civic Design, working with groups like the National Science Foundation, realized how crucial it was to manage this specific expectation. Just before the 2020 election, they found that only about half of voters actually expected a final outcome by the Friday after the election. That’s a lot of people expecting instant results! So, the Center offered some really smart advice to politicians, election officials, and local leaders on how to guide voter expectations. Their advice was simple, yet powerful: stay calm in all communications, repeat simple, truthful messages over and over, and, crucially, keep sharing evidence about how secure our elections actually are. And here’s a really important one: don’t repeat the misinformation, and don’t even bring up fraud, because the widespread existence of it has been debunked countless times. Instead, be as transparent as possible, updating information frequently and even offering timelines for when results might come in. It’s about being clear, calm, and consistent.
You know, it’s pretty clear that social norms and expectations can be a real double-edged sword. When they feed into wild conspiracy theories, they can really chip away at democracy. But if we can flip the script and use these same powerful forces to encourage voting and help people truly understand how vote-counting works, especially as we look towards the 2026 midterms, then a thoughtful, scientific approach can become a huge support for our democracy. I remember writing about the incredible power of social norms before, especially those we see on social media. And we’ve shared research showing that fact-checking, when done right, is absolutely welcome. You should indeed jump in and fact-check when you sense misinformation! But here’s the kicker: don’t even bother naming the false claim you’re trying to counter. Just share the unvarnished facts. The tricky thing about misinformation is that even repeating it to debunk it can sometimes backfire and make it stick even harder. So, our job is to tell the truth, clearly and consistently, without giving oxygen to the lies.
The good news is, we don’t have to reinvent the wheel here. There are some incredible nonpartisan organizations out there that have already done the heavy lifting, creating fantastic resources to help us all manage election expectations. As the primary season kicks off, these resources deserve to be amplified. For instance, there are ready-to-use social media graphics from a coalition of nonpartisan groups that came out in 2020, specifically designed to help set expectations. And a 2024 social media toolkit aimed at election officials is actually packed with great information for all of us. As we get closer to the 2026 midterms, we can expect even more of these helpful resources to pop up. Let’s make a conscious effort this primary season to share accurate information and foster realistic expectations, so we can all contribute to a stronger, more trusted electoral process. It’s about empowering people with facts, not fueling their fears with fiction.