Exact(1)
The companies' goals are simple: Getting more people registered means more people will actually vote, studies have shown.
Similar(7)
If the reviewers decide not to combine the data quantitatively, a danger is that eventually they may end up using quasi-quantitative rules of poor validity (such as vote counting of how many studies have nominally significant results) for interpreting the evidence.
Numerous studies have shown that electronic voting machines are particularly vulnerable to software glitches, intentional vote theft or sabotage.
As you say, "numerous studies have shown that electronic voting machines are particularly vulnerable to software glitches, intentional vote theft or sabotage".
Studies have also investigated how to design voting rules for crowd-based voting.
Studies have found repeatedly that in-person voting fraud is extremely rare, but that doesn't matter.
Many studies have been done on the mathematical value of one vote.
Several studies have investigated the effect of PI when other voting methods, such as flash cards or ABCD cards have been used.
Related(1)
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com