American democracy hinges on confidence, and that confidence is fracturing.

Almost half of U.S. citizens, including both Democrats and Republicans, doubt whether elections are fairly administered. Some voters only accept election outcomes when their preferred candidate triumphs. The issue goes beyond political division—it signifies a gradual decline of confidence in democracy’s foundational mechanisms.

Analysts attribute this crisis of confidence to ideological tribalism, misinformation tactics, and partisan echo chambers. However, these narratives overlook a significant factor: a rising discomfort with the digital frameworks that now support nearly every facet of American voting.

The digital evolution of American elections has been rapid and extensive. Just twenty years ago, the majority of voters utilized mechanical levers or punch cards. Currently, over 95% of ballots are tallied electronically. Digital technologies have succeeded poll lists, assumed voter identity verification tasks, and are embedded into registration, counting, auditing, and voting processes.

This technological advancement has rendered voting more accessible and efficient, and at times even more secure. Nonetheless, these new systems are considerably more intricate. This complexity aligns with the interests of those aiming to undermine democratic principles.

In recent years, authoritarian governments have honed a disturbingly effective tactic to erode Americans’ trust in democracy by continuously cultivating doubt about the systems states use to facilitate elections. It’s an ongoing campaign to weaken civic confidence and convince Americans that democracy is manipulated, particularly when they face a loss.

This scenario doesn’t constitute cyberwarfare in the conventional understanding. There is no indication that anyone has succeeded in infiltrating voting machines to modify votes. However, cyberattacks on electoral systems don’t need to be successful to be impactful. Even a solitary thwarted breach, amplified by sensational coverage and political echo chambers, is adequate to destabilize public trust. By tapping into pre-existing fears regarding the intricacy and opacity of digital frameworks, adversaries cultivate receptive ground for disinformation and conspiracy theories.

Evaluating cyber concerns

To investigate this phenomenon, we initiated a study to uncover how cyberattacks diminished trust in the voting process during the 2024 U.S. presidential election. We surveyed over 3,000 voters both prior to and following election day, employing a series of fictional yet highly plausible breaking news segments that illustrated cyberattacks on critical infrastructure. Participants were randomly assigned to view various types of news segments: some focused on cyberattacks on electoral frameworks, others on unrelated infrastructure like the power grid, with a third, neutral control group.

The findings, currently undergoing peer review, were both illuminating and concerning. Simple exposure to reports of cyberattacks diminished confidence in the electoral system—irrespective of political affiliation. Voters supporting the defeated candidate saw the most significant decrease in trust, with two-thirds of Democratic supporters displaying increased skepticism towards the election outcomes.

Yet even the victors showed reduced confidence. While most Republican voters, encouraged by their win, accepted the overall security of the election, the majority exposed to reports of cyberattacks remained dubious.

Interestingly, the attacks didn’t even need to pertain to the election. Cyberattacks against essential services like utilities generated collateral effects. Voters appeared to infer: “If the power grid is susceptible to hacking, why should I trust that voting machines are safe?”

Notably, voters who used digital systems to submit their ballots were the most unsettled. For this demographic, confidence in the vote count’s accuracy plummeted by nearly double that of voters who cast their ballots by mail and who did not engage with any technology. Their direct experience with the kinds of systems depicted as vulnerable personalized the threat.

This reaction is understandable. After using a touchscreen to cast their vote, encountering a news report about a digital system being compromised isn’t a far stretch of the imagination.

Our data indicates that in a digital environment, perceptions of trust—and distrust—are adaptable, contagious, and easily triggered. The cyber realm is not solely composed of networks and codes. It also encompasses emotions: fear, exposure, and uncertainty.

Barrier of confidence

Does this imply we should eliminate electronic voting systems? Not necessarily.

Every electoral framework, be it digital or analog, possesses shortcomings. In numerous ways, today’s advanced systems have resolved the issues of the past with voter-verifiable paper ballots. Modern voting technologies reduce human error, enhance accessibility, and accelerate vote counting. Nobody longs for the hanging chads from 2000.

However, technology alone, regardless of its sophistication, cannot independently foster legitimacy. It must be linked with something more challenging to fabricate: public trust. In an atmosphere where external adversaries amplify each flaw, cyberattacks can initiate cycles of suspicion. It’s insufficient for elections merely to be secure—voters must also believe they are secure.

This is why public education related to elections is now just as critical to election integrity as firewalls and encrypted networks. It is essential for voters to comprehend how elections are executed, how they are safeguarded, and how errors are identified and rectified. Election officials, civic organizations, and researchers can demonstrate how audits function, conduct open-source verification showcases, and guarantee that high-tech electoral methodologies are clear to voters.

We consider this to be a vital investment in democratic durability. However, it must be anticipatory, not merely reactive. Once doubt takes root, it is often too late.

Equally as important, we hold that it’s time to reassess the very nature of cyber threats. Individuals frequently envision them in military terms. Yet, this perspective fails to capture the true impact of these threats. The peril of cyberattacks extends beyond their potential to obliterate infrastructure or pilfer classified information; they erode societal cohesion, instill anxiety, and undermine citizens’ trust in democratic institutions. Such attacks deteriorate the very notion of truth by causing individuals to doubt the trustworthiness of anything.

If trust is the target, then we assert that elected officials should start viewing trust as a national resource: something to cultivate, rehabilitate, and protect. Ultimately, elections are not solely about votes being counted—they are about individuals believing that those votes matter.

And within that belief lies the true strength of democracy.

This essay was co-authored with Ryan Shandler and Anthony J. DeMattee and originally published in The Conversation.