MIT/ CALTECH/Carnegie : voting is worth technology
Ted Selker
MIT Media Laboratory
• Analysis and Engineering?
• Computers designed for tabulation and interaction– Paper interfaces better and easier?
– not solve the problem with computers and networks?
• Reference Platform?
• Public Policy in a Digital age:
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
Perceptual • Graphical
– View ability
• Color, contrast, size,
– Readability (this is)
• Distinctions, lack of distracters, experience
– Distinguishably (this is not that)
• Precognitive, cognitive,
• Feedback
– Proprioceptive feedback 50ms
– Social feedback 3 seconds
– Emotional feedback 30 + seconds
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
Cognitive Interface
• Short term memory 7 +- 2 ( in 2 d)
• Depth of information 2 or three
• The book that I bought with the other books proceeds…
• Recognition is better than Recall (except when the stimulus
is confusing “red” written in blue
• syntactic, semantic
• Cognitive load, bored … overloaded
• Precognitive recognition issues
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
Cognitive Styles
• Verbal/ Visual
• Procedural/Conceptual
• Myers Briggs
• Physical, perceptual, psychological, neurological
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
Obvious Design problems..• Distinguish ability
– Ambiguity, mislabel– Alignment– Viewable height– Poor audio, labeling on audio (1 …. To select gore 2…. to select Bush )
• Effects– Button association – Button not viewable
• Feedback and Side effects – Action– Undo … action symmetry?– Visual (x not counted)– Completion
• Validation– counted
• Mechanical– Difficult to pull, push, turn grab or reach– Parallax, – Dexterity, accuracy, – Button pressure
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
T1 T2 T3 T4
Day 1
0
2.5
5
7.5
10
12.5
15
17.5
20
Sec.Graphical interface mappings
-20 -40 -60 -80 -1000
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Free
Restrained
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
No Mask
Unmasked
Masked
Selction Performance: Masked (top) and Unmasked (bottom)
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
Seeing it all: visualization
• Perspective and focus
• View ability-vs- procedure that is easy to follow
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
marked
Office: select one with cursor or with touch
Candidate
Candidate
Candidate
Candidate
Perspective:Orient and focus
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
Principled voting
• No one is trustworthy
• We make mistakes with unfamiliar things
• Transcription is prone to error
• Transportation is prone to error
• Hard to make decisions without informationTed Selker © 2001, MIT
Eliminate people
• Immediate feedback
• No one person, organization, or mechanism in charge
• Personal Intentions matter:
• Consider , review and change their vote without coercion
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
Reference Platform: Brazil• Electronic voting; 96, 98, 2000
– 96 Unisys 7% failure– 98 Procomp – 2000 Procomp .02% failure 106,000,000 votes
• Trusted Scientific organization – Create requirements
• Trusted Technical organization – Create reference platform
• Companies (5)– Create demonstratable products for bid
• Government election officials – Create open viewing and decision of vendor
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
Public Policy in a Digital age:
• Computational Platforms: Simulations, the rhetoric of the future?
• “Mosaic” of opinion and decision; – Government,
– community,
– school,
– job,
– family,
– recreation,
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
IntentionsLearning by watching
• Typing • Hand motion• Voiceprint• I look around
– Interest Tracker, Invision• Eye aRe Personal gaze
– Looking for a sign?
- Robot seeks work as fuel tank inspector
Ballots:?
done
Orient and Focus
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
• Mistakes– computer bugs, – electrical,– mechanical, – transcription, – transportation
Behavioral Interface issues
• Goals
• Constraints
• Confidence
• Motivation
• Incentives
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
