NY Mayor proposes improvements to voter access, including ballot design

Yesterday, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced proposals calling for changes to state election law including allowing early voting. In addition, one proposal would let New Yorkers fill out their ballots at home and take them to a polling site; another will update the registration process and extend the registration period.

What we're most excited about, though, is that the Mayor is proposing simplifying the ballot design with a focus on plain language instructions.

This action is a direct result of talks that the Brennan Center for Justice's Larry Norden and UPA's Usability in Civic Life Project founder Whitney Quesenbery had with the mayor's office about New York's ballot and voting system design.

From the press release:

"Simplified Ballot Design:
Guaranteeing that ballot instructions are readily visible and in plain language will ensure that voters are better able to understand the process. Streamlining the ballot by eliminating unnecessary and uninformative text will make it easier to read."

Story in the New York Daily News

Press release from the mayor's office


ADDED afternoon 7 December 2010: The New York Times has picked up the story.

Top 10 guidelines for creating a plain language ballot

In June 2009, Ginny Redish and Dana Chisnell presented the findings from research they did for NIST on the language of instructions on ballots at the Usability Professionals' Association conference. In addition to their many fascinating findings, they distributed a handout with quick tips for creating and presenting plain language instructions for ballots. Here they are: 



What to say and where to say it

1. At the beginning of the ballot, explain how to vote, how to change a vote, and that voters may write in a candidate.

2. Put instructions where voters need them. For example, save the instructions on how to use the write-in page for the write-in page.

3. Include information that will prevent voters from making errors, such as a caution to not write in someone who is already on the ballot.


How to say it

4. Write short sentences.

5. Use short, simple, everyday words. For example, do not use "retention" and "retain." Use "keep" instead. For another example, use "for" and "against" for amendments and measures rather than "accept" and "reject."

6. Write in the active voice, where the person doing the action comes before the verb.

7. Write in the positive. Tell people what to do rather than what not to do.

8. When giving people instructions that are more than one step, give each step as an item in a numbered list. Do not number other instructions. When the instructions are not sequential steps, use separate paragraphs with bold beginnings instead of numbering.


What to make it look like

9. Keep paragraphs short. A one-sentence paragraph is fine.

10. Separate paragraphs by a space so each paragraph stands out on the page.

- From Redish, Chisnell, Newby, Laskowski, and Lowry, Use of Language in Ballot Instructions, NIST IR 7556.

To see all 28 guidelines, go to http://vote.nist.gov/NISTIR-7556.pdf. The guidelines are the last appendix in the report, pages 189-190. 

Come hear: UPAers on ballot usability, plain language, and evaluating doc for poll workers

Several of us on the Usability in Civic Life Project at the Usability Professionals' Association will be speaking at events in 2009 on topics that we hope elections officials, design practitioners, and human factors researchers are interested in. The dates, places, events, topic titles, and speakers are listed below.

Date	Place	Event	Topic title	Speakers
Feb 6	Washington, DC	NASED	Usability Testing Ballots	Dana Chisnell
May 3-6	Atlanta, GA	STC	Rewriting the Voting Experience On Election Day	Susan Becker, Ginny Redish, Whitney Quesenbery, Josie Scott, Sarah Swierenga, Dana Chisnell
June 12	Portland, OR	UPA	Improving the User Experience of Voting	Ginny Redish, Dana Chisnell, Sharon Laskowski, Svetlana Lowry
July 7-11	Spokane, WA	IACREOT	Improving the User Experience of Voting	Dana Chisnell
July 19-24	San Diego, CA	HCI International	User Experience in Elections: Poll Workers	Dana Chisnell, Karen Bachmann

Poll Worker Training Blamed for Voting Snafus

Proof that plain language requirements apply especially to pollworker materials and training:

The Associated Press ran a story this week about the number of polling problems that can be attributed to poor poll worker training. The snafus include hiding electronic voting machines because the workers did not like them; handing out the pens used for touch screens to mark paper ballots and calling them "invisible ink pens." Poll workers have provided wrong information - especially about this year's spate of confusing primaries - and inadvertently disenfranchised voters.

The story notes the concerns of the League of Women Voters, whose researcher, Lloyd Leonard, notes that we are "running the most important part of our democracy on the backs of untrained, poorly paid volunteers." Some two million pollworkers form the largest one-day work force, according the Pew Center on the States. Most receive just a few hours of training.

The training itself can fall far short: some did not receive instruction about operating the voting system in the precinct they were working. Some did not have an opportunity to actually practice on the machine: election day was their first experience following training.

UPA's Voting and Usability Project members note that good instructional material doesn't replace good training. Too many pollworkers are put in situations where they aren't well prepared and where they don't have the information they need. Usability and technical support professionals both know how "creative" people can be in trying to solve problems. We can't change human nature, but we can understand the stresses and problems of running an election, and be prepared.

The constraints of running an election often mean that pollworkers will need to fall back upon their instruction manuals and other written materials. Election officials are encouraged to 1) review their instructional materials, 2) clarify them with the plainest language possible, and 3) test their instructions with poll workers using a process similar to the LEO usability testing process for ballots.

More information:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080223/
ap_on_el_ge/pollworker_problems