3 ms·

Could this be an issue of that sentence you quoted being really difficult to comprehend? So they attempted to rewrite it and got it wrong? I’ve read it 10x and

• titzer 5y ago
  The quotes were my attempt at summarizing their abstract, what they actually wrote was: > The lack of negative impact on voter turnout cannot be attributed to voters’ reaction against the laws, measured by campaign contributions and self-reported political engagement. However, the likelihood that nonwhite voters were contacted by a campaign increases by 4.7 percentage points, suggesting that parties’ mobilization might have offset modest effects of the laws on the participation of ethnic minorities. Finally, strict ID requirements have no effect on fraud, actual or perceived. Overall, our findings suggest that efforts to improve elections may be better directed at other reforms. Which is completely different from their title.
• brendoelfrendo 5y ago
  > It’s the “voter turnout reduction of ID laws” That should be interpreted as "voter turnout reduction due to ID laws," or perhaps "voter turnout reduction as a result of the implementation of ID laws."