making voting accessible
DESCRIPTION
See the accompanying paper here: https://www.usenix.org/conference/evtwote14/workshop-program/presentation/summersTRANSCRIPT
Making voting accessible Designing digital ballot marking for people with low literacy
Dana Chisnell
@danachis @ChadButterfly
Kathryn Summers, University of Baltimore
Dana Chisnell, Center for Civic Design
Drew Davies, Oxide Design Co
Megan McKeever, University of Baltimore
Noel Alton, University of Baltimore
Accessible Voting Technology Initiative (AVTI)
sub grant from Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF)
How might we design an accessible election experience for everyone?
What if anyone could mark their ballot anywhere, any time, on any device?
Disability is treated as an accommodation
But what does “disability” mean?
HAVA requires an accessible system in each polling place
VVSG covers visible disabilities
blind, low vision
mobility
dexterity
What about invisible disabilities?
670,000 veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan have been awarded disability status
About 150,000 of them have PTSD
10-20% of all serving have TBI
low literacy - 44% of US adults
low education - 25-50% drop out
limited English proficiency
Where to start?
Best practice ballot designEffective designs for the administration of federal elections, 2007
Best practice ballot designNIST research on language of instructions on ballots Redish, et al, NIST IR 7556, 2009
2007
2008
Started with best practice
Low literacy: beyond plain languagelinear reading literal meaning struggle with word recognition understanding what words together mean
field of view is narrow
not able to pay attention to what might be coming up
can’t remember where they came from
Implicationssequential, linear processing support
pages must stand alone, make sense independently
headings must work out of context
adjacent paragraphs must be independent
Challengeprovide an overview showing the structure of the ballot !
+ !without losing specificity and clarity in interaction
MethodCombined research and design methods !Generative, exploratory !Paper prototype —> digital prototype !Rapid Iterative Testing and Evaluation (RITE)
RITEcollaborative identification of issues in each session immediate development of theory for remedy !Medlock, et al. Using the RITE method to improve products; a definition and a case study, 2002
Process33 sessions (18 paper; 15 digital) NIST medium complexity ballot protocol from NIST IR 7556
Processat least 3 iterations up to 20
Results
many iterations plain interaction
Simpler language bolding key phrases for skimming correcting order and focus
Simpler language bolding key phrases for skimming correcting order and focus
Positive, prescriptive wordingVote for up to 5. You have 5 choices left. !Plus instructions for marking the ballot.
Positive, prescriptive wordingVote for up to 5. You have 3 choices left.
Positive, prescriptive wordingVote for up to 5. You can choose 2 more.
Scrollingfor non-computer users buttons at the top and bottom of the visible candidate names !visible scroll bar, or on the iPad by flicking with a finger
Scrollingfor non-computer users with a label that went from “Touch to see additional candidates” to “Touch to see more names”
Vertical layout
Vertical layoutfor linear reading and processing !allowed more text without scrolling
Deselect messageintentional changes !recovering from the message Close button simplified wording important information bolded
Deselect messageintentional changes !recovering from the message Close button simplified wording important information bolded
Spacing and proximityon the Review screen made a huge difference in understanding and performance
Spacing and proximityon the Review screen made a huge difference in understanding and performance
Interaction patternOut, with steps back Out and back, using Review as a hub
Confirmation messageAre you sure? ! versus !Are you finished?
Confirmation messageAre you sure? ! versus !Are you finished?
Lessons learned
test the languagechoice options vote cast
make it look easy to read
support users’ preferred interactions
The process proved the conventions were broken
Plain interactionThe fewest, simplest steps with maximal focus on the user’s immediate next interaction.
Mobile voting is coming
In the meantime…
If it’s not accessible, it’s not usable.
Thank you. Especially to
ITIF University of Baltimore Whitney Quesenbery
Dana Chisnell
centerforcivicdesign.org
anywhereballot.com/library@danachis@ChadButterfly