Study: Partisan Ties Shape How Voters View Campaign AI
ALBANY, N.Y. (Oct. 28, 2026) — As political campaigns increasingly use artificial intelligence to communicate with voters, questions arise about how the technology influences perceptions of election fairness and trust.
A newly published study by Seulki Lee-Geiller, a researcher at UAlbany's Center for Technology in Government (CTG), examines how those perceptions change depending on which political party voters believe is using artificial intelligence (AI).
The study, "AI as a partisan cue: the relational dynamics of AI-assisted campaign messaging in election integrity perceptions,” published Sept. 24 in the Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, explains how political affiliation influences perceptions of AI-assisted campaign messaging and election integrity.
Same message, different reactions
Lee-Geiller conducted an online survey experiment involving 3,055 U.S. participants in June and July 2024, ahead of the 2024 presidential election.
Participants were randomly assigned to four groups and shown a hypothetical campaign letter from a presidential candidate. The content remained identical, but the groups received different information about its creation. One received a letter without mention of AI, another was told AI helped draft it, and the remaining groups were told either their preferred or opposing political party had used AI.
Participants then evaluated aspects of election integrity, including fairness, authenticity, freedom from fraud and representation of voters' interests.
"What we found is that simply knowing AI was used in a campaign message didn't significantly change how people viewed its fairness or authenticity," Lee-Geiller said. "But participants were more likely to believe AI was being used to target messages to specific audiences. The bigger differences emerged when political affiliation was introduced."
Participants who believed their preferred party had used AI gave more favorable assessments of election integrity, while those who believed the opposing party had used it expressed greater skepticism about fairness and authenticity.
On a five-point scale, the average authenticity rating was 3.71 when AI use was attributed to a participant's preferred party, compared with 3.37 when attributed to an opposing party.
Implications for AI governance
The findings suggest that existing political affiliations can influence how voters interpret AI-assisted communications, even when the messages themselves are identical.
"As AI becomes more common in political communication, we need to think beyond what the technology can do and consider how people understand and respond to it," Lee-Geiller said. "Transparency, consistent standards and digital literacy can help people make more informed judgments about AI-assisted messages, regardless of who is using the technology."
The findings speak to areas central to CTG's work, including responsible technology use, citizen trust and good governance.
The exploratory study measured short-term reactions to hypothetical campaign materials rather than actual election conditions. Lee-Geiller notes that additional research could examine how these perceptions develop through exposure to AI-assisted messaging in real-world campaigns.