[EM] Usability studies of ranking/rating/approval methods

[James Gilmour]

Steve
You MAY be interested to take a look at this Guidance on ballot paper design issued by the UK Electoral Commission, and some
associated documents:

Making your mark: design guidance for government policy-makers 
 
http://bureau-query.funnelback.co.uk/search/click.cgi?rank=7&collection=electoral-commission&component=0&docnum=4147&url=http%3A%2F%
2Fwww.dopolitics.org.uk%2F__data%2Fassets%2Fpdf_file%2F0003%2F80931%2FMaking-Your-Mark-Design-Guidance-For-Government-Policy-Makers-
Web-Final-2.pdf&index_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dopolitics.org.uk%2F__data%2Fassets%2Fpdf_file%2F0003%2F80931%2FMaking-Your-Mark-Design-G
uidance-For-Government-Policy-Makers-Web-Final-2.pdf&search_referer=

Making your mark: designing for democracy 	
 
http://bureau-query.funnelback.co.uk/search/click.cgi?rank=3&collection=electoral-commission&component=0&docnum=11545&url=http%3A%2F
%2Fwww.electoralcommission.org.uk%2F__data%2Fassets%2Fword_doc%2F0008%2F67184%2FMaking-your-mark-Project-summary-Sept-2008.doc&index
_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.electoralcommission.org.uk%2F__data%2Fassets%2Fword_doc%2F0008%2F67184%2FMaking-your-mark-Project-summary-Sept
-2008.doc&search_referer=

Uservision report on ballot paper design 
 
http://bureau-query.funnelback.co.uk/search/click.cgi?rank=1&collection=electoral-commission&component=0&docnum=12313&url=http%3A%2F
%2Fwww.electoralcommission.org.uk%2F__data%2Fassets%2Fpdf_file%2F0008%2F77687%2FUservision-report-on-ballot-paper-design---FINAL.pdf
&index_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.electoralcommission.org.uk%2F__data%2Fassets%2Fpdf_file%2F0008%2F77687%2FUservision-report-on-ballot-pap
er-design---FINAL.pdf&search_referer=

The Electoral Commission Ballot Paper Testing Summary Final Report 
 
http://bureau-query.funnelback.co.uk/search/click.cgi?rank=2&collection=electoral-commission&component=0&docnum=12311&url=http%3A%2F
%2Fwww.electoralcommission.org.uk%2F__data%2Fassets%2Fpdf_file%2F0007%2F77686%2FThe-Electoral-Commission-Ballot-Paper-Testing-Summar
y-Final-Report.pdf&index_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.electoralcommission.org.uk%2F__data%2Fassets%2Fpdf_file%2F0007%2F77686%2FThe-Electoral
-Commission-Ballot-Paper-Testing-Summary-Final-Report.pdf&search_referer=

James Gilmour



> -----Original Message-----
> From: election-methods-bounces at lists.electorama.com 
> [mailto:election-methods-bounces at lists.electorama.com] On 
> Behalf Of Steve Wolfman
> Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 8:53 PM
> To: election-methods at electorama.com
> Subject: [EM] Usability studies of ranking/rating/approval methods
> 
> 
> There's been some recent discussion of which ballots are 
> easiest to use.  
> Does anyone know of published (experimental) studies of usability of 
> non-plurality ballots (perhaps vs. plurality ballots)?
> 
> I'd be happy to take personal responses and summarize for 
> anyone who would 
> rather not post to the list.
> 
> 		Thanks,
> 
> 		Steve
> 
> P.S. From what I've looked at so far: A good starting point into the 
> literature on usability for plurality ballots is Sarah 
> Everett's thesis: 
> The Usability of Electronic Voting Machines and How Votes Can 
> Be Changed 
> Without Detection.  That references Herrnson et al's book "Voting 
> Technology: The Not-So-Simple Act..", also a substantial work 
> in the area. 
> Both discuss usability of a few non-standard ballot features 
> (e.g., review 
> screens/VVPAT), and at least the latter discusses "select 2" 
> contests. 
> However, neither addresses ranked/rated/approval ballots.  In 
> the US, NIST 
> has developed usability standards for voting (specifically 
> for non-ranked 
> contests).  Here's NIST's voting homepage 
> http://www.nist.gov/itl/vote/, 
> but I haven't found the navigation path to the specific usability 
> benchmark document yet; so, see: 
> http://vote.nist.gov/meeting-08172007/Usability-Benchmarks-081707.pdf
> 
> ---------------------
> Steven Wolfman, Ph.D.
> Sr Instructor, UBC CS
> 
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em 
> for list info
>