Human factors researchers test voting systems for seniors

Dec 27, 2007

Human factors researchers at Florida State University have identified ways to improve electronic voting accuracy among older voters while also shortening waiting time at the polls. The results of their study were published in the fall 2007 issue of Ergonomics in Design.

During the 2000 presidential election in Palm Beach County, Florida, voting machines and ballot formats came under national scrutiny after it was found that more than 29,000 ballots were spoiled. The use of punchcard machines and a confusing ballot layout caused some voters to select an unintended candidate or double-punch the ballot. In 2004 in Ohio, the issue of time at the polls became a critical factor; despite the use of electronic voting machines, a confusing ballot layout and an insufficient number of machines caused long waiting lines and prevented some Ohioans from voting.

These problems led Tiffany Jastrzembski and Neil Charness to test ballot and machine usability with a particular focus on older voters, who – because of reduced vision and motor control – tend to have more problems using computers, especially under time pressure. These researchers adopted a gerontological approach, which implies that when systems are made easier for older people to use, performance among younger users also improves.

The researchers tested voting performance with 30 younger (18–26 years old) and 30 older (ages 64–77) study participants using four ballot layouts and machine designs: (a) touchscreen and full ballot on one screen, (b) touchscreen and one ballot per screen, (c) touchscreen plus keypad and full ballot on one screen, and (d) touchscreen plus keypad and one ballot per screen.

The pure touchscreen format with one ballot per screen was found to produce the most accurate results, but the pure touchscreen with full ballot on a single screen showed the fastest completion times. As is often the case with human-machine interfaces, there is a trade-off between accuracy and speed. Even a small percentage of errors could potentially result in hundreds of thousands of miscast ballots, which must be weighed against the need to reduce waiting times at the polls.

Jastrzembski and Charness recommend additional studies – again with older voters – that can lead to more user-friendly ballot design and electronic voting systems for users of all ages.

Source: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society

Explore further: Lady, you're on the money

Related Stories

E-Voting: Risky technology or great improvement?

Nov 28, 2014

On this forthcoming weekend the Australian state election takes place, and in Victoria State they will be using a new e-voting system to improve secrecy, reliability and user-friendliness. But how secure are such systems? ...

Vote glitch reports pile up in US election (Update)

Nov 06, 2012

Voting went smoothly in Tuesday's US elections, except when it didn't. Some computer problems, as well as human ones, drew complaints across the country as millions of Americans went to the polls.

Recommended for you

Lady, you're on the money

Jul 03, 2015

So far, women whose portraits appear on U.S. money have been a party of three. Excluding commemorative currency, only Sacagawea, Susan B. Anthony and Helen Keller appear on coins in general circulation, according ...

Another five things to know about meta-analysis

Jul 01, 2015

Last year I wrote a post of "5 Key Things to Know About Meta-Analysis". It was a great way to focus – but it was hard keeping to only 5. With meta-analyses booming, including many that are poorly done or ...

User comments : 0

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.