• Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • UMass Chan Departments, Programs, and Centers
    • Population and Quantitative Health Sciences
    • Population and Quantitative Health Sciences Publications
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • UMass Chan Departments, Programs, and Centers
    • Population and Quantitative Health Sciences
    • Population and Quantitative Health Sciences Publications
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of eScholarship@UMassChanCommunitiesPublication DateAuthorsUMass Chan AffiliationsTitlesDocument TypesKeywordsThis CollectionPublication DateAuthorsUMass Chan AffiliationsTitlesDocument TypesKeywords

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Help

    AboutSubmission GuidelinesData Deposit PolicySearchingTerms of UseWebsite Migration FAQ

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    Percentage-Based versus Statistical-Power-Based Vote Tabulation Audits

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Authors
    McCarthy, John
    Stanislevic, Howard
    Lindeman, Mark
    Ash, Arlene S.
    Addona, Vittorio
    Batcher, Mary
    UMass Chan Affiliations
    Department of Quantitative Health Sciences
    Document Type
    Journal Article
    Publication Date
    2008-02-01
    Keywords
    Biostatistics
    Epidemiology
    Health Services Research
    Statistics and Probability
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Link to Full Text
    http://dx.doi.org/10.1198/000313008X273779
    Abstract
    Several pending federal and state electoral-integrity bills specify hand audits of 1% to 10% of all precincts. However, percentage-based audits are usually inefficient, because they require large samples for large jurisdictions, even though the sample needed to achieve good accuracy is much more affected by the closeness of the contest than population size. Percentage-based audits can also be ineffective, since close contests may require auditing a large fraction of the total to provide confidence in the outcome. We present a plausible statistical frame-work that we have used in advising state and local election officials and legislators. In recent federal elections, this audit model would have required approximately the same effort and resources as the less effective percentage-based audits now being considered.
    Source
    John McCarthy, Howard Stanislevic, Mark Lindeman, Arlene S Ash, Vittorio Addona, Mary Batcher. The American Statistician. February 1, 2008, 62(1): 11-16. doi:10.1198/000313008X273779.
    DOI
    10.1198/000313008X273779.
    Permanent Link to this Item
    http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/47622
    ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
    10.1198/000313008X273779.
    Scopus Count
    Collections
    Population and Quantitative Health Sciences Publications

    entitlement

     
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2023)  DuraSpace
    Lamar Soutter Library, UMass Chan Medical School | 55 Lake Avenue North | Worcester, MA 01655 USA
    Quick Guide | escholarship@umassmed.edu
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.