Full face vs scrolling ballot presentation

From: Dennis Paull <dpaull_at_svpal_dot_org>
Date: Thu Sep 04 2003 - 16:55:58 CDT

Hi all,

Here is a link to a site that addresses, in part, the issue of
whether the ballot should be presented one or a few races at a time
or with as many as can be squeezed in as possible.

Personally, I favor simple displays at the expense of more clicks.

Dennis

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Subject: RE: votingtech sorry, and lever machine question
>Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 15:05:16 -0500
>From: "Kimball, David C." <kimballd@msx.umsl.edu>
>To: <votingtech@hss.caltech.edu>
>
>Hi all:
> In a study I did on gubernatorial elections in 2002, full-face DREs had a
>significantly higher residual vote rate than DREs with a scrolling format.
>The theory is related to what Roth says - that the full-face design
>overwhelms some voters by presenting all offices and all candidates at once.
> In contrast a scrolling format divides the ballot into more digestible
>units (usually one office at a time). I'm not sure how that translates to
>the upcoming recall election in California, with 135 candidates for one
>office. Clearly it will be a challenge to design a ballot that minimizes
>voter error. A link to the paper is http://www.umsl.edu/~kimballd/dkmpsa.pdf.
> More generally, I've updated my web page on voting technology and election
>reform with some more recent papers and maps
>(http://www.umsl.edu/~kimballd/dk_vote.htm).
>- David
>_______________________________
>David Kimball
>Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science
>University of Missouri-St. Louis
>8001 Natural Bridge Rd.
>St. Louis, MO 63121-4499
>phone: 314-516-6050
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Dennis Paull [mailto:dpaull@svpal.org]
>Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 12:53 PM
>To: votingtech@hss.caltech.edu
>Subject: Re: votingtech sorry, and lever machine question
>
>
>Hi Mike et al,
>
>I would guess that the only meaningful way to evaluate this would
>be by side-by-side in-person comparisons. Setup voting machines both
>ways in a shopping center and have a whole lot of folks try them out.
>
>I think it is really hard for folks to imagine what such machines might
>look like. Even giving them a choice between two systems is hardly
>evaluating the range of possibilities.
>
>The most important concern is eyesight. Folks with poor vision will not
>want to try to see 135 candidates on one page.
>
>Dennis Paull
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>At 10:41 PM 9/3/2003 Wednesday , you wrote:
>>Sorry for sending the previous blank message!
>>
>>In any event, I am curious to see if anyone knows of any research
>>on the so-called "full-face ballot" design, in which all candidates
>>for each office and all propositions appear on the face of a
>>single ballot. In particular, any studies on useability,
>>accessibility, and error rates of these ballot designs compared
>>to other designs that allow races and ballot measures to appear
>>on separate pages of a ballot?
>>
>>I have only been able to track down one related study, that might
>>be of interest to list readers: Susan Roth's study, "Disenfranchised
>>by design; voting systems and the election process" available in
>>electronic form at http://informationdesign.org/pubs/pdf/roth1998.pdf
>>
>>*********************************************************************
>>R. Michael Alvarez (O) 626-395-4422
>>Professor of Political Science (F) 626-405-9841
>>Co-Director, Caltech/MIT Voting Technology Project
>>California Institute of Technology
>>Pasadena, CA 91125
>>rma@hss.caltech.edu
>>*********************************************************************
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Tue Sep 30 23:17:01 2003

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Sep 30 2003 - 23:17:09 CDT