Research & Experiments

Field Activities Overview

Bottom Line: In general, methods using live conversation (e.g., canvassing and phonebanking) are more effective than other methods of voter outreach.

All Field Tactics

• Research shows that voter outreach tactics are more effective in “quieter” election contexts. They are most effective in odd-years and special elections, which means that a greater volume of voter outreach is needed in even years, e.g., presidential years.
• Industry research¹ generally finds that tactics are especially impactful closer to the election. The final weeks before the election are generally referred to as GOTV (Get Out the Vote).
• On average, industry studies estimate that turnout effects across tactics are in the range of 0.2-3.0% (this is more than enough to sway an election, especially state/local elections).
• On average, academic studies find larger effects. This may be due to academics running studies in quieter elections, using more random samples, or a bias towards reporting positive results.
• Volunteer field efforts often outperform paid field efforts (but not always; quality is key).²

Canvassing

• Canvassing reliably produces some of the best results in increasing turnout.
• In Green and Gerber’s book, Get Out the Vote, they report that canvassing increased voter turnout in 44 out of the 51 studies they considered.³
• Canvassing is the most effective volunteer tactic out of the major 4 (canvassing, phonebanking, textbanking, handwritten postcarding/letter-writing; Industry source).³

Phonebanking

• Phonebanking is the best choice for remote volunteering.
• Industry tests show it is up to twice as effective as textbanking and postcarding.
• Phonebanking helps to boost voter turnout.
• Nickerson and colleagues found that nonpartisan GOTV calls helped to boost turnout by 1.6-3.8% in several different studies across election contexts.^4,5

Textbanking

• Text messages have a small effect on voter turnout.
• Texting has been found to boost turnout from 0.2 – 3.0% depending on targeting/message quality and election type.^{Industry source,6}
• Keep it informational.
• Voters are best mobilized by information about how to vote during GOTV.

Postcarding and Letter-Writing:

• Postcarding and letter-writing both appear to have small, modest effects.
• They have been found to boost turnout from 0.1-1.4% depending on targeting/message quality and election type (Industry source).
• No direct comparisons of handwritten or partially handwritten postcards and letters exist.

References:

1. Industry source (SDAN has access to various research reports by progressive organizations that we are not allowed to disseminate or cite but are sharing broad strokes of here).
   Nickerson, D. W. (2007). Quality is job one: Professional and volunteer voter mobilization calls. American Journal of Political Science, 51(2), 269-282. (https://sites.temple.edu/nickerson/files/2017/07/Quality.Nickerson.2007.pdf)
2. Green, D. P., & Gerber, A. S. (2015). Get out the vote: How to increase voter turnout (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
   Nickerson, D. W. (2006). Volunteer phone calls can increase turnout: Evidence from eight field experiments. American Politics Research, 34(3), 271-292. (https://sites.temple.edu/nickerson/files/2017/07/Nickerson.APR2005.pdf)
3. Nickerson, D. W., Friedrichs, R. D., & King, D. C. (2006). Partisan mobilization campaigns in the field: Results from a statewide turnout experiment in Michigan. Political Research Quarterly, 59(1), 85-97. (https://iop.harvard.edu/sites/default/files_new/research-policy-papers/king_nickerson_2005.pdf)
4. Dale, A., & Strauss, A. (2009). Don’t forget to vote: text message reminders as a mobilization tool. American Journal of Political Science, 53(4), 787-804.

Download the PDF: Field Research Overview

Phonebanking

Definition: Calling to talk to voters on the phone.
Bottom line: If canvassing is not an option, phonebanking is the next best thing.

Considerations

Pros – Best way to talk to voters remotely; most evidence it works compared to other tactics you can do remotely; helps reach rural and exurban areas
Cons – Somewhat less effective than canvassing; low contact rates

Research findings

1. Phonebanking is the best choice for remote volunteering.
   • Industry tests¹ show an average effect that is significant and is up to twice as effective as textbanking and postcarding.
2. Phonebanking helps to boost voter turnout.
   • Academics (Nickerson) found that nonpartisan GOTV calls boosted turnout by 3.8% in 8 different studies across election contexts, compared to similar voters who didn’t receive the GOTV calls.²
   • Academics (Nickerson, Friedrichs, and King) found that GOTV phone calls around the 2002 gubernatorial election in Michigan boosted turnout by 1.6%, compared to similar voters who did not receive the GOTV calls.³
3. Phonebank quality matters.
   • Academics (Nickerson) found that phone calls that are unhurried, personal, and allow room for a genuine dialogue with the voter (3-5% boost in turnout) are more effective than calls by hurried, poorly trained callers who were focused on call volume rather than quality (0.5% boost in turnout).⁴
   • Robo-calls are generally ineffective in increasing turnout, demonstrating the need for personal connection.⁵
4. Calls to warm contacts are better than cold during GOTV.
   • Recontacting committed voters close to election day to GOTV is more effective than cold-calling people who have not already been identified as supporters.⁶
   • This means that phonebanking before GOTV is critical, so that when GOTV rolls around, we are calling people the campaign has already talked to.
5. Areas for further exploration:
   • Effectiveness of phonebanking in combination with other tactics, e.g., postcarding.
   • Completed/planned SDAN studies:
     • 2019 Phonebank/canvass postcard chaser pilot study (MS/LA – results expected summer 2020)
     • 2020 Phonebank/canvass postcard chaser study (TX)

References:

1. Industry source (SDAN has access to various research reports by progressive organizations that we are not allowed to disseminate or cite but are sharing broad strokes of here).
2. Nickerson, D. W. (2006). Volunteer phone calls can increase turnout: Evidence from eight field experiments. American Politics Research, 34(3), 271-292. (https://sites.temple.edu/nickerson/files/2017/07/Nickerson.APR2005.pdf)
3. Nickerson, D. W., Friedrichs, R. D., & King, D. C. (2006). Partisan mobilization campaigns in the field: Results from a statewide turnout experiment in Michigan. Political Research Quarterly, 59(1), 85-97. (https://iop.harvard.edu/sites/default/files_new/research-policy-papers/king_nickerson_2005.pdf)
4. Nickerson, D. W. (2007). Quality is job one: Professional and volunteer voter mobilization calls. American Journal of Political Science, 51(2), 269-282. (https://sites.temple.edu/nickerson/files/2017/07/Quality.Nickerson.2007.pdf)
5. Green, D. P., & Gerber, A. S. (2015). Get out the vote: How to increase voter turnout (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
   Industry source

Download the PDF: Phonebanking Research

Postcarding & Letter-Writing

Definition: Sending fully or partially handwritten postcards or letters to voters in the mail.
Bottom line: The effectiveness of postcarding needs more research.1 There’s evidence that postcarding has small effects on voter turnout and voter registration.

Considerations

Pros – Postcards and letters can reach addresses inaccessible by canvassing; introvert-friendly volunteer activity; relatively cheap
Cons – Not as effective as personal contact methods; handwriting varies in legibility; limited space for message

Research findings

1. Postcarding generally has a small effect on voter turnout.
   • Industry research² generally finds a small, positive boost from GOTV postcarding (~0.1-1.4%). Results will always vary, but the largest effect (1.4%) was found in a 2007 Gubernatorial election when targeting unmarried women.
   • Good targeting matters. Our 2018 GOTV postcard experiment³ found null results, but the voters we sent postcards to were not representative of all Democratic voters in the district, which likely attenuated those results.
2. Letter writing may offer promising results with small effects on voter turnout.
   • While no results have been made public, Vote Forward reportedly found in 2 studies that partially handwritten letters provide a small positive boost to special election turnout. One study had small, statistically significant results, while a second study did not have significant results.
3. Postcarding appears to be effective when “chasing” another contact.
   • SDAN ran two studies sending chaser postcards to people who had already received voter registration forms in the mail.
     • In the first study⁴, people who received chaser postcards registered at a 20% higher rate than people who did not receive postcards.
     • In the second study⁵, people who received chaser postcards registered at a 12% higher rate than people who did not receive a postcard (increase in registrants of 0.26%).
4. Areas for Further Exploration:
   • Motivating/educating voters who need a nudge to vote (low propensity voters) but who will likely vote Democratic if they do (high support voters).
   • Planned/ongoing SDAN studies:
     • GOTV postcard experiments – replication with more representative sample
     • Head-to-head comparison between handwritten letters and postcards
     • Two primaries – relevance of education in increasing primary turnout
     • Postmark – relevance of postmark location (local vs non-local)
     • 2019 Phonebank/canvass postcard chaser pilot study (MS/LA – results expected summer 2020)
     • 2020 Phonebank/canvass postcard chaser study (TX)

References and notes:

1. We are aware of postcarding/letter writing reports from groups like Tony the Democrat (Postcards to Voters), Blue Virginia and Blue Wave Analytics, but they aren’t experiments or they are purely market research studies. Therefore we cannot draw reliable conclusions from these reports and so we have not included them in this overview.
2. Industry source (SDAN has access to various research reports by progressive organizations that we are not allowed to disseminate or cite but are sharing broad strokes of here).
3. https://sisterdistrict.com/research/2018-gotv-postcarding-results
4. https://sisterdistrict.com/research/postcarding-experiment-results
5. https://sisterdistrict.com/research/voter-registration-postcards-replication

Download the PDF: Postcarding Research