Date post: | 28-Jan-2015 |
Category: |
News & Politics |
Upload: | dana-chisnell |
View: | 106 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Plain language for voters and election workers
1
Dana Chisnell, UPA | Usability in Civic Life Drew Davies, AIGA | Design for DemocracyKim Kizer, Elections Division - Texas
IACREOT - Spokane - 2009
optical scanDREpunch cardlever
Many changes
2
http://www.flickr.com/photos/plemeljr/61432544/
3
HistoryExpense MachinesState law
Constraints exist
lower residual vote rates + better security
Best practice
+ Incremental changes
+ Usability testing
5
6
Design problems cause voter errors
Design best practice helps
Plain language helps
Best practice + usability testing helps
Resources
The Texas story
7
Design problems cause voter errors
Design best practice helps
Plain language helps
Best practice + usability testing
Resources
The Texas story
8
Key pointsPoor ballot design frustrates voters, undermines confidence, and contributes to related Election Day problems
9
Dana Chisnell
Key pointsThousands of votes are lost or miscast
All voters are affected
The risk is greater for some groups of voters
All voting technologies are affected
Usability testing is the best way to make sure that voters are successful
10
Dana Chisnell
Design for Democracy - EAC
11
Best practice is a great place to start to
redesign ballots
12
Design problems cause voter errors
Design best practice helps
Plain language helps
Best practice + usability testing
Resources
The Texas story
Top 10 election design guidelines
1 Use lowercase letters
Optical scan ballots [detail]
Rolling DRE (touchscreen) ballot [detail]
2 Avoid centered type
Rolling DRE (touchscreen) ballot [detail]
3 Pick one sans-serif font
Optical scan ballots [detail]
Rolling DRE (touchscreen) ballot [detail]
Voter information materials [detail]
4 Use big enough type
Optical scan ballots [detail]
Rolling DRE (touchscreen) ballot [detail]
Voter information materials [detail]
5 Support processand navigation
Optical scan ballots [detail]
Rolling DRE (touchscreen) ballot [detail]
Voter information materials [wayfinding]
6 Use clear, simple language
“A vote for the names of a political partyʼs candidates for president is a vote for the electors of that party…”
Vote for one
“Vote for not more than one set of candidates” Vote for one pair
STATE REFERENDA 2A - CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
SHALL CITY OF SPRINGFIELD DEBT BE INCREASED BY AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $4,600,000, WITH A MAXIMUM REPAYMENT COST OF $8,000,000, AND SHALL CITY OF SPRINGFIELD TAXES BE INCREASED $1,047,000 (FIRST FULL FISCAL YEAR DOLLAR INCREASE) ANNUALLY; SUCH DEBT TO CONSIST OF SALES TAX REVENUE BONDS ISSUED SOLELY FOR THE FOLLOWING PURPOSES:· ACQUIRING, CONSTRUCTING AND EQUIPPING A COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER WHICH SHALL INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING:· AQUATICS CENTER/SWIMMING POOL· FITNESS CENTER· GYMNASIUM FOR BASKETBALL, VOLLEYBALL, AEROBICS AND OTHER ACTIVITIES· FAMILY, YOUTH AND SENIOR MULTI-PURPOSE ROOMS· PAYING ALL NECESSARY OR INCIDENTAL COSTS RELATED THERETO, INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING:· OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE EXPENSES, WHICH MAY INCLUDE EXERCISE AND RECREATION ACTIVITIES FOR ALL AGES, INTERESTS AND ABILITIES· THE FUNDING OF A BOND RESERVE FUND AND COSTS OF ISSUING THE BONDS SUCH BONDS TO BE ISSUED, DATED AND SOLD AT SUCH TIMES, AND AT SUCH PRICES (AT, ABOVE OR BELOW PAR) AND CONTAINING SUCH TERMS, NOT INCONSISTENT HEREWITH, AS THE CITY COUNCIL MAY DETERMINE; SUCH TAX TO BE IMPLEMENTED BY AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 5.06 OF THE SPRINGFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE AND TO CONSIST OF A RATE INCREASE IN THE CITY-WIDE SALES TAX OF 0.70% (SEVENTY ONE-HUNDREDTHS OF ONE PERCENT, WHICH REPRESENTS SEVEN CENTS ON EACH TEN DOLLAR PURCHASE AS SHOWN IN THE TAX SCHEDULE AT THE END OF THIS BALLOT ISSUE) BEGINNING ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2005, WITH A REDUCTION OF SUCH TAX TO 0.50% (FIFTY ONEHUNDREDTHS OF ONE PERCENT, WHICH REPRESENTS FIVE CENTS ON EACH TEN DOLLAR PURCHASE) BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2026 OR SUCH LOWER RATE AS THE CITY COUNCIL MAY DETERMINE AFTER SUCH DATE, TO BE USED SOLELY TO PAY THE FOLLOWING:· COSTS OF ACQUIRING, CONSTRUCTING AND EQUIPPING THE COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER DESCRIBED ABOVE· PAYING DEBT SERVICE ON THE SALES TAX REVENUE BONDS DESCRIBED ABOVE· PAYING ALL NECESSARY OR INCIDENTAL COSTS RELATED THERETO, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE EXPENSES, WHICH MAY INCLUDE EXERCISE AND RECREATION ACTIVITIES FOR ALL AGES, INTERESTS AND ABILITIES, AND REPAIRS, RENEWALS, REPLACEMENTS AND RENOVATIONS THEREOF, AND THE FUNDING OF RESERVES THEREFOR; AND· CONSTRUCTION OR UPGRADES TO CITY OUTDOOR ATHLETIC FACILITIES; AND SHALL ALL TAX REVENUES GENERATED FROM THE SALES TAX AUTHORIZED HEREIN AND FROM ANY EARNINGS FROM THE INVESTMENT OF SUCH REVENUES AND THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH BONDS CONSTITUTE A VOTER-APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE, AND AN EXCEPTION TO THE REVENUE AND SPENDING LIMITS OF ARTICLE X, SECTION 20 OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION, OR ANY OTHER LAW?
7 Use accurate instructional illustrations
Optical scan ballots [detail]
Rolling DRE (touchscreen) ballot [detail]
Voter information materials
8 Use informational icons (only)
Optical scan ballots [detail]
Voter information materials [detail]
9 Use contrast and color functionally
Rolling DRE (touchscreen) ballot
Optical scan ballots [detail]
10 Decide what’s most important
Grid-style optical scan ballot
Optical scan ballot [detail]
Voter information material
Top 10 election design guidelines
• Use lowercase letters• Avoid centered type• Pick one sans-serif font• Use big enough type• Support process and navigation• Use clear, simple language• Use accurate instructional illustrations • Use informational icons (only)• Use contrast and color functionally• Decide whatʼs most important
• EAC report• Sample files and software• Get design help• Additional resources
Resources
Get design help
• www.designfordemocracy.org• AIGA Designer Directory• AIGA Election Design Fellows now in
Oregon and Washington• [email protected]
Additional resources
Marcia Lausen: Ballot + Election Design[University of Chicago Press]
Additional resources
Ballot design sample collection
Additional resources
AIGA | Design for DemocracyGet Out The Vote campaign
67
Design problems cause voter errors
Design best practice helps
Plain language helps
Best practice + usability testing
Resources
The Texas story
HAVA and NIST
68
✤ HAVA calls for improved standards for voting systems
✤ NIST provides technical support to develop standards through EAC and TGDC
Design for every voter
69
✤ Universal access and usability
✤ Design standards based on best practice and research
✤ Performance standards: user-based testing
Groundbreaking
70
✤ First ever standards for usability and accessibility of voting systems
✤ Unique performance-based usability standards
Wanted: research on plain language in elections
71
2005Review of ballot instructions and system messages
2006-08Test of ballot instructions
2007Review of voting system documentation
2008Development of pass/fail test of voting system documentation for poll workers
72
Does plain language make a difference when people vote?
73
Does clear information make a difference in election worker performance?
74
Does plain language make a difference when people vote?
Do voters vote more accurately on a ballot with plain language instructions?
Do voters recognize the difference in language?
Do voters prefer one ballot over the other?
75
Empirical study of language on ballots
Who participated? 45 voters
Eligible - US citizens age 18+
Focused on lower education levels
Balanced for gender ethnicity age (18-61; median = 36)
76
Education achieved
# of participants
Less than high school
High school or equivalent
Some college or associate
Bachelor’s degree
Courses beyond college
9
15
12
8
1
Where, what3 locations Georgia Maryland Michigan
suburban, city, small town
2 ballots only the wording was different based on NIST DRE “medium” ballot
77
78
Ballot A (traditional language)
Ballot B (plain language)
79
“Retain” or “Keep”?
80
81
Does plain language make a difference when people vote?
Yes.
82
45 participants; 18 possible correct votes on each ballot
Marginally statistically significant, p<.071
83
Participants voted more accurately
Ballot A Ballot B Total
Correct
Incorrect
Total
698 726 1424
112 84 196
810 810 1620
Voting on B first helped on A
Very little difference on B whether it was first or second
A first, ave. correct = 14.4A second, ave. correct = 16.3
Statistically significant, p<.001
84
0
4.175
8.350
12.525
16.700
A First B First
Co
rrec
t Vo
tes
Correct Votes on ACorrect Votes on B
Participants recognized and overwhelmingly preferred plain language
85
Preference # of participants % of participants
Ballot A (traditional language)
Ballot B (plain language)
No preference
Total
4 9%
37 82%
4 9%
45 100%
Education made a difference
86
Education level Mean # correct both ballots
Less than high school (n=9)
High school graduate or equivalent (n=15)
Some college or associate
Bachelor’s degree (n=8)
Some courses beyond college (n=1)
14.4
15.6
16.0
17.4
17.0
Statistically significant, p<.004
1. At the beginning of the ballot, explain how to vote, how to change a vote, and that voters may write in a candidate.
87
2. Put instructions where voters need them.
88
3. Include information that will prevent voters from making errors, such as a caution to not write in someone already on the ballot.
89
4. Write short sentences.
90
5. Use short, simple, everyday words.
91
6. Write in active voice, where the person doing the action comes before the verb.
92
7. Write in the positive. Tell people what to do rather than what not to do.
93
8. When giving people instructions that are more than one step, give each step as an item in a numbered list. Do not number other instructions.
94
9. Keep paragraphs short. A one-sentence paragraph is fine.
95
10. Separate paragraphs by a space so each paragraph stands out on the page.
96
To see all 28 guidelines, go to http://vote.nist.gov/NISTIR-7556.pdf
The guidelines are the last appendix in the report, pages 189-190
97
98
Does clear information make a difference in election worker performance?
How should the documentation be tested? What are poll workers’ tasks? How long do the tasks take?
How many participants will it take to pass or fail the documentation?
What should the pass/fail criteria for the documentation be?
99
Qualitative, exploratory study of voting system documentation for poll workers
Testing the test
✤ Drafted protocol and checklists
✤ Recruited 4 pairs of participants
✤ 2 voting systems - one DRE and one optical scan
✤ Each pair worked on both systems
100
Observations
101
102
Matching the documentation to the machine was difficult
Dana Chisnell
103
Participants had questions that the documentation didn’t answer
Dana Chisnell
104
Information on troubleshooting was hard to use because it was not related to tasks
Dana Chisnell
105
Documentation covered too many systems
Met many best practices but fails because the configuration is not the same as implementation
106
Met many best practices but fails because the configuration is not the same as implementation
107
108
Does clear information make a difference in election worker performance?
109
Yes.
✤ Participants are able to use voting system documentation to:
✤ Complete tasks without asking questions
✤ Find the information they need
✤ Match messages between system and documentation
✤ Read, understand, and react
✤ Perform tasks without missing steps
✤ Perform steps to complete tasks
110
Evidence
✤ Have participants asked for help?
✤ Have they completed the tasks in the time allotted?
111
Pass / fail criteria
112
Design problems cause voter errors
Design best practice helps
Plain language helps
Best practice + usability testing
Resources
The Texas story
What is a usability test?
113
114
What is usable? You: A countable ballot
Voter: Voting as intended
Dana Chisnell
115
Sit next to someone. Watch. Listen.
Dana Chisnell
116
Complement to best practice
When something changes
Take constraints into account
Reveal remedies
Why test?Avoid residual votes and fall-off
Even best practice design can introduce unpredictable problems
Make it more likely that voter intent is carried out
More likely to have only good news about an election
117
Dana Chisnell
The Testing KitWhat you need to know
Session script
Report template
118
The Testing KitWhat you need to know
Session script
Report template
119
The Testing KitWhat you need to know
Session script
Report template
120
The Testing KitWhat you need to know
Session script
Report template
121
122
Redesign.
Look at best practice within your constraints
Use checklists
Test.
Low risk, low cost
Reveal issues that are local, subtle
Improve.
Smoother voting
Smoother counting
Better experience
123
Design problems cause voter errors
Design best practice helps
Plain language helps
Best practice + usability testing
Resources
The Texas story
Resources
Usability Professionals’ Association: www.usabilityprofessionals.org/
LEO Usability Testing Kit:http://www.usabilityprofessionals.org/civiclife/voting/leo_testing.html
Ballot Usability and Accessibility Blog: http://ballotusability.blogspot.com/
National Institute of Standards and Technology:http://vote.nist.gov
124
Dana Chisnell
Resources
Brennan Center for Justice at NYU: Better Ballotshttp://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/better_ballots/
AIGA - Design for Democracy: Effective Design for Federal Elections http://www.aiga.org/content.cfm/design-for-democracy-eac-reports
Handbook of Usability Testing, Second Edition by Jeff Rubin and Dana Chisnell
125
Dana Chisnell
Announcing
126
LEOExchange Online discussion group for local election officials
129
Design problems cause voter errors
Design best practice helps
Plain language helps
Best practice + usability testing
Resources
The Texas story
Voter Registration Form (Before)
Voter Registration Form (After)Version 1
Voter Registration Form (After)Version 2
Back of this form looks exactly like Version 1 – horizontal layout versus vertical layout
Application Ballot by Mail (Before)Front
Application Ballot by Mail (Before)Back
Application Ballot by Mail (After)Front
Layout went from bifold to
trifold
Application Ballot by Mail (After)Back
Layout went from bifold to
trifold
137
Questions?
138
Thank you.