Kaila White of The Arizona Republic described the methodology as being widely trusted and used to compare electoral performance around the world.[6]
The project received media attention in 2016 when it ranked the United States last among Western nations. An editorial in The Wall Street Journal ridiculed the study, noting that "Democracy in New York (which scored a 61) and Virginia (60) is supposedly more imperiled than in Rwanda (64), though Rwanda is controlled by an autocrat. The worst-performing state, Arizona (53), is outranked by Kuwait (55), Ivory Coast (59) and Kyrgyzstan (54)."[7]Dylan Matthews writing in Vox agreed that "it seems foolish to infer from that that the US is less of a democracy than Rwanda" but felt that the EIP had highlighted important issues such as gerrymandering and voter registration laws.[8]
Statistician Andrew Gelman critiqued the index as seeming like "an unstable combination of political ideology, academic self-promotion, credulous journalism, and plain old incompetence", noting among other things that the EIP's 2014 data release[9] has previously given the North Korean parliamentary election an 'electoral integrity' score of 65.3 and Cuba 65.6, higher than elections in EU members Romania and Bulgaria.[10][11] Norris replied to Gelman noting that her team had subsequently dropped the North Korean election from the dataset. Gelman, however, questioned her justification for this removal and continued to question the EIP's methodology more generally.[12]
^White, Kaila (December 28, 2016). "Arizona the worst for electoral integrity, experts say". The Arizona Republic (USA Today). Retrieved 30 December 2016. Those indicators were interpreted into a 100-point scale. Arizona scored a total of 53, while the best state, Vermont, scored 75.