Re: Full face vs scrolling ballot presentation

From: Douglas W. Jones <jones_at_cs_dot_uiowa_dot_edu>
Date: Thu Sep 04 2003 - 19:51:19 CDT

On Thursday, September 4, 2003, at 04:55 PM, Dennis Paull wrote:

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

>> 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>
>>
>> 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.

This oversimplifies the issue. Full-face ballots can be readable,
and multi-page ballots can be unworkable. The problem with a focus
on residual vote as your only measure of success is that it factors
out many of the actual causative factors that lead to a voter's failure
to vote in some race.

For example, a ballot design where those races the voter has yet to
cast a vote in are highlighted is likely to fare better than a ballot
design where the whole ballot is just one big uniform blur. They're
both full-face ballots.

Ballots you have to page through have the effect of highlighting the
individual races, particularly if they force you to page through the
entire ballot before you get the option to cast a vote.

Clearly, this entire area needs research!

                                Doug Jones
                                jones@cs.uiowa.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