ArticleNature communications2026
Rejection-based choices discourage people from opting out of voting.
Article in Nature communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Rejection-based choices discourage people from opting out of voting.Nature communications · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Representing the will of voters is challenging when many opt out of indicating their preferences. Such opt-out behavior has been explained by voters lacking a preference and/or disliking their options. We provide evidence for a third account: people opt out of choosing between undesirable candidates because bad options are incongruent with their typical goal of selecting the best one. Using a voting task, we show across two lab-based studies that the tendency to opt out of choices between bad candidates is eliminated when participants are asked to reject the worst candidate. Leveraging our experimental findings, we simulate elections and show that rejection-based voting can produce election outcomes that are more representative of the preferences of the electorate. To validate this prediction, we conduct two Prolific surveys of self-reported US Independents before the 2024 US presidential election, and show that people are less likely to respond "undecided" when asked who they will vote against rather than who they will vote for. Our findings help understand when and how people vote, and how to better reveal the preferences of voters who know which candidates they like least but are unwilling to endorse the one they like most.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.