Psephos (Adam Carr’s Election Archive)

Research project

The Psephos election archive is maintained by Australian journalist Adam Carr, who created the archive in 1985 at his own initiative.





Psephos (Adam Carr’s Election Archive)


On-screen tables





Last reviewed


Data types and sources

Election data.

Data download



Psephos contains data on legislative and presidential elections. A few countries also include data on state and provincial elections. Most datasets in Psephos cover eligible voters, votes cast, invalid votes and valid votes. Some datasets also cover seat distributions and changes to such distributions.

Geographical coverage

The database covers more than 170 countries and provides data as national summaries and frequently also on districts level.

Time coverage and updates

The archive contains data from the 1990s to the present. Time coverage varies according to country. For Australia the archive covers all elections since 1901. The database is updated continuously.


Sources and party information are usually available, but data are otherwise not documented.

Access conditions and cost

Available free of charge.

Access procedures

Predefined tables. The site is organised alphabetically by country and each country has an introductory page.

Data formats

On-screen tables.

Comparability and data quality

The main strength of the Psephos archive is the large number of countries and elections it covers. However, data are compiled from a wide range of sources, from national election authorities, newspapers, and from individual researchers, meaning that good accuracy of the data cannot always be guaranteed. Apart from the source of the data, no additional metadata is offered. Also, the archive provides a varying coverage of different countries, not all elections in all countries are always covered, and some countries have results reported on constituency level while in other cases only national summaries are available. Small parties are often collapsed into an “Other”-category, meaning that information on smaller and niche parties is not accessible through this resource. These features could potentially complicate comparison beyond results on the national level and beyond analysis on mainstream parties.