Presentation to the Committee on Future of Voting: Accessible, Reliable, Verifiable Technology at the National Academies of Science, Engineering, Medicine (NASEM) in contribution to the report Securing the Vote: Protecting American Democracy (2018)
Updated with annotation on the ballot images.
Finance strategies for adaptation. Presentation for CANCC
Defects by design: Ballots that fool voters
1. Defects by design | 1
Defects by design
Ballots that fool voters
Whitney Quesenbery
Center for Civic Design
@civicdesign | @whitneyq
2. EAC / Design for Democracy Effective Designs for the Administration of Federal Elections (2007)
Better Ballots (2008), Better Design, Better Elections (2012) and Design Deficiencies and Lost Votes (2011)
Field Guides to Ensuring Voter Intent, Vol 01 Designing Usable Ballots
Anywhere Ballot
3. A failure of intent caused by
Typography
Ballot layout
Marking mechanisms
Instructions and messages
and election codes that require poor design
5. Defects by design | 5
43% of adults in the US read
at basic or below basic levels
U.S. National Assessment of Adult Literacy http://nces.ed.gov/naal/kf_demographics.asp
14% 29% 44% 13%
30
Million
63
Million
95
Million
28
Million
6. Defects by design | 6
If you can’t read the ballot effectively,
you can’t vote accurately
Look at all the
confusing text
and graphics
7. Defects by design | 7
If you can’t read the ballot effectively,
you can’t vote accurately
Good typography
can make even a
rows-and-
columns ballot
easier to use
8. Defects by design | 8
If you can’t find the correct marking location,
you can’t vote accurately
The layout on
the right makes
it easier to find
the correct
mark.
The layout on
the left skips
holes in
unpredictable
ways.
9. Defects by design | 9
If you don’t know how voting works,
you can’t vote accurately
Can you tell that you
should only vote on
one side of the
ballot?
And that your vote is
not counted if you
do?
10. Defects by design | 10
Make contest boundaries easy to see
1. A contest hidden below instructions
2. A contest hidden above another contest. Look
how much clearer when it’s on its own page.
2. A New York City ballot (the have gotten a little
better since this election!)
11. Defects by design | 11
Never - ever - split a contest across columns or pages
With 34 candidates for Senate, California election officials struggled to
find layouts that wouldn’t cause overvotes. See
https://civicdesign.org/breaking-the-ballot/
12. Defects by design | 12
A consistent and unambiguous relationship between
voting choice and marking mechanism
When the oval or arrow or
square is to the left of the
name, it’s got a stronger
association.
Multi-column ballots make
ovals on the right an even
worse problem.
13. Defects by design | 13
A consistent and unambiguous relationship between
voting choice and marking mechanism
A good mitigation in a
state whose election
code says that the
ovals must be on the
right – staggering the
rows.
14. Defects by design | 14
Give voters control of all actions that make or change a
ballot selection
Every ballot marking
device should have a
well-designed review
screen.
The Help America
Vote Act requires that
voters are warned of
overvotes, but
scanners don’t
usually warn about
undervotes.
15. Defects by design | 15
Don’t force voters into problem-solving
Tell voters what they can do.
Don’t make them do arithmetic.
16. Defects by design | 16
Don’t force voters into problem-solving
Don’t use terms that
voters won’t
understand.
Design messages to
help voters take
action to make their
ballot reflect their
intent.
17. Defects by design | 17
Clear, minimal, helpful instructions
in the right place
There is really nothing to say.
The short clean text, good layout
and visual illustration speaks for
itself.
18. Defects by design | 18
Clear, minimal, helpful instructions
in the right place
Our research to design better ranked
choice ballots and instructions
showed that it’s the right words, not
more words.
https://civicdesign.org/projects/rcv/
19. Ballot design can help
voters be successful
Follow proven election design principles
Meet voters' needs for easy interaction,
plain language, and clear design
Test with voters
Discuss: design defects that lead to votes not being counted and offer recommendations that might be implemented to correct for this.
Thank all the work
All of it. Ballots are riddled with simple basic design problems from the overall layout of the ballot to instructions.
I’m not even going to talk about accessibility much, because others are going to cover that. Except to say that almost all of the problems I’m going to discuss affect people with disabilities, low literacy, low English proficiency and most of all civic literacy gaps disproportionately
So they not only don’t meet all of our various laws intended to ensure equal access to the ballot, but they exacerbate the disparities.
What makes this so aggravating is that the solutions we can recommend are not new and not even cutting edge design. We have known about some of the solutions for at least 17 years – but really much more. Let’s start with typography.
U.S. National Assessment of Adult Literacy http://nces.ed.gov/naal/kf_demographics.asp
Below basic – only the most simple and concrete reading skills
Basic – able to manage everyday tasks
Intermediate – moderately challenging activities like consulting reference material
Proficient – interpreting text, comparing viewpoints
Below Basic: 14% or 30 million people
Basic: 29% or 63 million people
Intermediate: 44% or 95 million
Proficient: 13% or 28 million
Text size – complaints galore in 2010 when NYC ballots didn’t even reach the level of the VVSG
Clutter – party emblems, all capital letters, row and column identifiers, instructions in the wrong place, voting ovals to the right of names
Our demonstration of a ballot that meets proposed Voter Friendly Ballot Act
Shorter, clearer instructions at the top of the ballot where they will be read
Reduced clutter leaving room for larger text
Shading and lines help separate contests, even with the full face restriction
Ovals to the left and immediately next to the candidate name
2008 testing with 100 people
More than 14,000 missing votes for CD 13 in Sarasota County (14% of voters).
Charlotte County had 2.5% residual votes
Consistency, headings, one contest per page if that’s the usual standard
Of 8.5M voters, 236K overvotes – 3%
Los Angeles: 2M votes 150K overvotes – 7%Madera: 27K votes, 850 overvotes – 3%
Santa Cruz: 95K votes, 985 overvotes – 1%
Why the fetish for marking on the right, where it has an uneven relationship to the names.
Single columns better!
Ballot A – 116 errors - 9 overvotes
Ballot B – 92 errors – 4 overvotes
Not significant, but a clear trend, also stronger preference.
2008 testing with 100 people