Alphabetical ballot order shows measurable edge in England local votes

Candidates listed earlier on ballot papers in last week’s local elections in England were more likely to finish ahead of their party colleagues, according to an analysis of results compiled by Democracy Club. The figures point to an “alphabet effect” in wards where parties fielded three candidates, with those placed first more likely to top their party’s vote than those listed later. The pattern appeared across parties, though the size of the advantage varied.

In wards where a party stood three candidates, the candidate listed first topped their party’s vote 65% of the time, or 2,200 instances, the data showed. Candidates listed third topped their party’s slate 11% of the time, or 382 instances. If ballot order had no relationship with performance, each position would be expected to account for roughly one-third of top votes.

The analysis examined 864 wards where at least one party fielded three candidates. It found that candidates whose surnames appear earlier in the alphabet generally outperformed their party’s average vote share, while those with surnames starting with letters later in the alphabet tended to underperform.

Party-by-party differences in the “alphabet effect”

The pattern was most pronounced within Reform, where about 74% of alphabetically advantaged candidates led their party’s vote. Fewer than 8% of Reform candidates listed at the bottom of the ballot paper topped their party’s slate, the figures showed.

The Green party showed the second-strongest surname effect, followed by the Labour party, according to the analysis. The data also suggested a broader trend in which candidates with surnames beginning with letters nearer the end of the alphabet were less likely to lead their party’s vote.

How ballot design can shape close contests

The findings add to evidence that ballot paper positioning can influence voter choice, particularly in multi-candidate local races where vote margins can be narrow. In the systems examined, candidate ordering is determined by alphabetical order of surnames.

With many councils electing three councillors per ward, the analysis suggests that small, consistent advantages tied to name placement could affect who finishes ahead within a party’s slate in some wards. The data did not assess why voters may be influenced by ballot order.

Further scrutiny is likely to focus on whether ballot-order rules should be changed in multi-seat contests, including proposals to alter or randomise how candidates are listed.