Electronic voting system usability issues

ABSTRACT

With recent troubles in U.S. elections, there has been a nationwide push to update voting systems. Municipalities are investing heavily in electronic voting systems, many of which use a touch screen. These systems offer the promise of faster and more accurate voting, but the current reality is that they are fraught with usability and systemic problems. This paper surveys issues relating to usability of electronic voting systems and reports on a series of studies, including one with 415 voters using new systems that the State of Maryland purchased. Our analysis shows these systems work well, but have several problems, and many voters have concerns about them.

REFERENCES

• 1: Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act. (1994). 42 U.S.C. 1973 et. seq.
• 2: Voting System Accessibility Comparison. (2001). Nat'l Organization on Disability, Washington, DC.
• 3: National Voter Independence Project www.halftheplanet.com/departments/vote/intro.html {2002}.
• 4: Allen, P. L. (1906). Ballot Laws and Their Workings. Political Science Quarterly, 1, pp. 38--58.
• 5: Bain, H. M., & Hecock, D. S. (1957). Ballot Position and Voters Choice. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
• 6: Beard, C. A. (1909). The Ballot's Burden. Political Science Quarterly, 24, pp. 589--614.
• 7: Bullock, C. S. I., & Dunn, R. E. (1996). Election Roll-Off: A Test of Three Explanations. Urban Affairs Review, 32, pp. 71--86.
• 8: Caltech/MIT Voting Technology Project. Residual Votes Attributable to Technology: An Assessment of the Reliability of Existing Voting Equipment (2001). http://www.vote.caltech.edu/Reports/.
• 9: Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., & Stokes, D. E. (1960). The American Voter. New York: Wiley.
• 10: Darcy, R., & McAllister, I. (1990). Ballot Position Effects. Electoral Studies, 9(1), pp. 5--17.
• 11: Darcy, R., & Schneider, A. (1989). Confusing Ballots, Roll-Off, and the Black Vote. Western Political Quarterly, 42, pp. 347--364.
• 12: Election Data Services Inc. 1998 Voting Equipment Study Report (1998). http://electiondataservices.com /content/vote_equip.htm.
• 13: Federal Election Commission. The administrative structure of state election offices: voting systems (2000). http://www.fec.gov/elections.html.
• 14: Key, V. O. Jr. (1956). American State Politics. New York: Knopf.
• 15: Kimball, D. C., Owens, C., & McAndrew, K. (2002). Unrecorded Votes in the 2000 Presidential Election. (Report No. Unpublished manuscript). University of Missouri-St. Louis.
• 16: Krosnick, J. A., Miller, J. M., & Tichy, M. P. (in press). An Unrecognized Need for Ballot Reform: The Effects of Candidate Name Order on Election Outcomes. New York: Oxford University Press.
• 17: 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, pp. 92--107.
• 18: Rebecca T. Mercuri , Norman I. Badler, Electronic vote tabulation checks and balances, 2001
• 19: Miller, J. M., & Krosnick, J. A. (1998). The Impact of Candidate Name Order on Election Outcomes. Public Opinion Quarterly, 62, pp. 291--330.
• 20: Nichols, S. M. (1998). State Referendum Voting, Ballot Roll-Off and the New Electoral Technology. State and Local Gov't Review, 30, pp. 106--117.
• 21: Nichols, S. M., & Strizek, G. A. (1995). Electronic Voting Machines and Ballot Roll-Off. American Politics Quarterly, 23, pp. 300--318.
• 22: 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, pp. 6--16.
• 23: Robinson, J. A., & Standing, W. H. (1960). Some Correlates of Participation: The Case of Indiana. Journal of Politics, 22, pp. 96--111.
• 24: Roth, S. K. (1998). Disenfranchised by Design: Voting Systems and the Election Process. Information Design Journal, 9(1), pp. 1--8.
• 25: Rusk, J. (1970). The Effect of the Australian Ballot Reform on Split Ticket Voting. American Political Science Review, 64, pp. 1220--1238.
• 26: Sinclair, R. C., Mark, M. M., Moore, S. E., Lavis, C. A., & Soldat, A. S. (2000). An Electoral Butterfly Effect. Nature, 408, pp. 665--666.
• 27: U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. Voting Irregularities in Florida During the 2000 Presidential Election (2001). http://www.usccr.gov.
• 28: Walker, J. L. (1996). Ballot Forms and Voter Fatigue: An Analysis of the Office Block and Party Column Ballots. Midwest Journal of Political Science, 10, pp. 448--463.
• 29: Wand, J. N., Shotts, K. W., Sekhon, J. S., Mebane, W. R., 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, pp. 793--810.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.2 User Interfaces (D.2.2, H.1.2, I.3.6)
          Subjects: Evaluation/methodology

Additional Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.2 User Interfaces (D.2.2, H.1.2, I.3.6)
          Subjects: Screen design (e.g., text, graphics, color); Graphical user interfaces (GUI)

Keywords:
direct recording electronic (DRE), electronic voting systems, voting usability