This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Google Scholar Articles by Herrnson, P. S. Articles by Traugott, M. W. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Voters' Evaluations of Electronic Voting Systems

Results From a Usability Field Study

University of Maryland

Richard G. Niemi

University of Rochester

Michael J. Hanmer

University of Maryland

Peter L. Francia

East Carolina University

Benjamin B. Bederson

University of Maryland

Frederick G. Conrad

University of Michigan, University of Maryland

Michael W. Traugott

University of Michigan

Electronic voting systems were developed, in part, to make voting easier and to boost voters' confidence in the election process. Using three new approaches to studying electronic voting systems—focusing on a large-scale field study of the usability of a representative set of systems—we demonstrate that voters view these systems favorably but that design differences have a substantial impact on voters' satisfaction with the voting process and on the need to request help. Factors associated with the digital divide played only a small role with respect to overall satisfaction but they were strongly associated with feeling the need for help. Results suggest numerous possible improvements in electronic voting systems as well as the need for continued analysis that assesses specific characteristics of both optical scan and direct recording electronic systems.

Key Words: election reform • voting technology • public opinion • usability • voting machines

References

• Allen, P.L. (1906). Ballot laws and their workings. Political Science Quarterly, 21, 38-58.[CrossRef]
• Alvarez, R.M., Sinclair, D.E., & Wilson, C. (2004). Counting ballots and the 2000 election: What went wrong? In A. Crigler, M. Just, & E. McCaffery (Eds.), Rethinking the vote (pp. 34-50). New York: Oxford University Press.
• Alvarez, R.M., & Hall, T.E. (2004). Point, click, and vote: The future of Internet voting. Washington, DC: Brookings.
• Alvarez, R.M., Hall, T.E., & Llewellyn, M. (in press). Are Americans confident their ballots are counted? Journal of Politics.
• Ansolabehere, S., & Stewart, C., III. (2005). Residual votes attributable to technology. Journal of Politics, 67, 365-389.[CrossRef][ISI]
• Atkeson, L.R., & Saunders, K.L. (2007). The effect of election administration on voter confidence: A local matter. Political Science and Politics, 60, 655-660.
• Bain, H.M., & Hecock, D.S. (1957). Ballot position and voters choice. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.
• Beard, C.A. (1909). The ballot's burden. Political Science Quarterly, 24, 589-614.[CrossRef]
• Bederson, B.B. (2001). PhotoMesa: A zoomable image browser using quantum treemaps and bubblemaps. UIST 2001, ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. CHI Letters, 3, 71-80.
• Bederson, B.B., Conrad, F.G., Herrnson, P.S., Niemi, R.G., & Traugott, M.W. (2005, February). Designing interfaces for voting machines. Paper presented at the annual meetings of the National Association of Election Directors and American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, DC.
• Bensel, R.F. (2004). The American ballot box in the mid-nineteenth century. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Brady, H.E., Buchler, J., Jarvis, M., & McNulty, J. (2001). Counting all the votes: The performance of voting technology in the United States. Survey Research Center and Institute of Governmental Studies, University of California-Berkeley. Retrieved January, 12, 2006, from http://ucdata.berkeley.edu/new_web/countingallthevotes.pdf
• Brady, H.E., & Hui, I. (2006, June). Let's not forget about accuracy. Paper presented at the workshop on the Usability and Security of Electronic Voting Systems, College Park, MD.
• Bullock, C.S., III, & Hood, M.V., III. (2002). One person-no vote, one vote, two votes: Voting methods, ballot types, and undervote frequency in the 2000 presidential election. Social Science Quarterly, 83, 981-993.[CrossRef][ISI]
• Caltech/MIT. (2001). Residual votes attributable to technology: An assessment of the reliability of existing voting equipment. Retrieved February 2, 2007, from http://www.vote.caltech.edu/Reports
• Campbell, A., Converse, P.E., Miller, W.E., & Stokes, D.E. (1960). The American voter. New York: Wiley.
• Campbell, A., and W.E. Miller. (1957). The motivational basis of straight and split ticket voting. American Political Science Review, 51, 293-312.[CrossRef][ISI]
• Conrad, F.G., Lewis, B., Peytcheva, E., Traugott, M.W., Hanmer, M.J., Herrnson, et al. (2006, April). The usability of electronic voting systems: Results from a laboratory study. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
• Election Data Services. (2006). About 55 million, or one-third of the nation's voters, will face new voting equipment in 2006 election. Retrieved December 1, 2007, from http://www.edssurvey.com/images/File/ve2006_nrpt.pdf
• Feldman, A.J., Halderman, J.A., & Felten, E.W. (2007). Security analysis of the Diebold AccuVote TS voting machine. Princeton, NJ: Center for Information Technology Policy, Princeton University. Retrieved February 2, 2007, from http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting
• Green, D.P., & Gerber, A.S. (2004). Get out the vote! How to increase voter turnout. Washington, DC: Brookings.
• Grissom, S.B., & Perlman, G. (1995). StEP(3D): A standardized evaluation plan for three-dimensional interaction techniques. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 43, 15-41.[CrossRef]
• Herrnson, P.S., Niemi, R.G., Hanmer, M.J., Bederson, B.B., Conrad, F.G., Traugott, M.W. (2008). Voting technology: The not-so-simple task of casting a ballot. Washington, DC: Brookings.
• Herrnson, P.S., Niemi, R.G., Horowitz, J.M., & Richman, S. (2003). Characteristics of contemporary voting machines. College Park: Center for American Politics and Citizenship, University of Maryland. Retrieved February 2, 2007, from http://www.capc.umd.edu/rpts/md_evote_ContempVotingMach.pdf
• Herron, M.C., & Sekhon, J.S. (2003). Overvoting and representation: An examination of overvoted presidential ballots in Broward and Miami-Dade Counties. Electoral Studies, 22, 21-47.[CrossRef][ISI]
• Herron, M.C., & Sekhon, J.S. (2005). Black candidates and Black voters: Assessing the impact of candidate race on uncounted vote rates. Journal of Politics, 67, 154-177.[CrossRef][ISI]
• Jewett, A. (2001, August). Explaining variation in ballot invalidation among Florida counties in the 2000 election. Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, San Francisco.
• Keyssar, A. (2000). The right to vote. New York: Basic Books.
• Kimball, D.C., (2004). Assessing voting methods in 2002. Unpublished manuscript, University of Missouri- St. Louis.
• Kimball, D.C., & Kropf, M. (2005). Ballot design and unrecorded votes on paper-based ballots. Public Opinion Quarterly, 69, 508-529.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Kimball, D.C., & Kropf, M. (2006, January). Ballot initiatives and residual ballots in the 2004 presidential election. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southern Political Science Association, Atlanta, GA.
• Kimball, D.C., Owens, C.T., & Keeney, K.M. (2004). Residual votes and political representation. In R. P. Watson (Ed.), Counting votes: Lessons from the 2000 presidential election in Florida. Gainesville: University of Florida Press.
• Knack, S., & Kropf, M. (2003). Voided ballots in the 1996 presidential election: A county-level analysis. Journal of Politics, 65, 881-897.[ISI]
• Kropf, M.E., & Knack, S. (2004). Balancing competing interests: Voting equipment in presidential elections. In R. P. Watson (Ed.), Counting votes: Lessons from the 2000 presidential election in Florida. Gainesville: University of Florida Press.
• Krosnick, J.A., Miller, J.M., & Tichy, M.P. (2003). An unrecognized need for ballot reform: The effects of candidate name order on election outcomes. In A. N. Crigler, M. R. Just, & E. J. McCaffery (Eds.), Rethinking the vote: The politics and prospects of American election reform. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Kubeck, J.E., Delp, N.D., Haslett, T.K., & McDaniel, M.A. (1996). Does job-related training performance decline with age. Psychology and Aging, 11, 92-107.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
• Lausen, M. (2007). Design for democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Mebane, W.R., Jr. (2006, July). Election forensics: Vote counts and Benford's Law. Presented at the annual meeting of the Political Methodology Society, University of California-Davis.
• Mueller, J.E. (1970). Choosing among 133 candidates. Public Opinion Quarterly, 34, 395-402.[Abstract]
• Nielsen, J. (1994). Usability engineering. Morgan Kaufmann: San Francisco.
• Nielsen, J. (2003). Usability 101: Introduction to usability. Retrieved February 2, 2007, from http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20030825.html
• Niemi, R.G., & Herrnson, P.S. (2003). Beyond the butterfly: The complexity of U.S. ballots. Perspectives on Politics, 1, 317-326.
• Riviere, C.N., & Thakor, N.V. (1996). Effects of age and disability on tracking tasks with a computer mouse: Accuracy and linearity. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 33, 6-16.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
• Rubin, A.D. (2006). Brave new ballot. New York: Random House.
• Rusk, J.G. (1970). The effect of the Australian ballot reform on split ticket voting. American Political Science Review, 64, 1220-1238.[CrossRef][ISI]
• Saltman, R.G. (2006). The history and politics of voting technology. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Tomz, M., & Van Houweling, R.P. (2003). How does voting equipment affect the racial gap in voided ballots? American Journal of Political Science, 47, 46-60.[CrossRef][ISI]
• Traugott, M.W., Hanmer, M.J., Park, W., Niemi, R.G., Herrnson, P.S., Conrad, F.G., et al. (2008). Losing fewer votes: The impact of changing voting systems on residual votes. Unpublished manuscript.
• U.S. Census Bureau. (2005). Computer and Internet use in the United States: 2003. Retrieved November 2, 2005, from http://www.census.gov/prod/2005pubs/p23-208.pdf
• Walker, J.L. (1966). Ballot forms and voter fatigue: An analysis of the office block and party column ballots. Midwest Journal of Political Science, 10, 448-463.[CrossRef]
• Wand, J.N., Shotts, K.W., Sekhon, J.S., Mebane, W.R., Jr., Herron, M.C., & Brady, H.E. (2001). The butterfly did it: The aberrant vote for Buchanan in Palm Beach County, Florida. American Political Science Review, 95, 793-810.[ISI]
• Wattenberg, M.P., McAllister, I., & Salvanto, A. (2000). How voting is like taking an SAT test: An analysis of American voter rolloff. American Politics Quarterly, 28, 234-250.[CrossRef][ISI]

CiteULike

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati

This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Google Scholar Articles by Herrnson, P. S. Articles by Traugott, M. W. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?