This document summarizes usability testing of ballot paper prototypes for tablets over 4 days with 18 participants and 16 iterations. It describes iterations tested for instructions, supplemental content, straight party voting, multi-candidate contests, judge retention contests, referenda, ballot measures, write-ins, and reviewing and casting votes. The testing aimed to refine designs for tiny screens and minimal instructions. Further usability testing of digital prototypes was planned for mid-January 2013.
As a practice, UX is confused about what is a short cut, what is a convention, and what is a best practice. Fortunately, the process on this project revealed where all of those were broken for the target users: people with low literacy.
As a practice, UX is confused about what is a short cut, what is a convention, and what is a best practice. Fortunately, the process on this project revealed where all of those were broken for the target users: people with low literacy.
Counter to intent: Voters' mental models of alternative counting methodsDana Chisnell
Here I talk about some preliminary findings from exploratory research about whether voters encounter problems using ballots that include contests that are counted in non-traditional ways.
California's top lessons learned in design and languageDana Chisnell
Introducing the Field Guides To Ensuring Voter Intent through an analysis of classic ballot design issues and the California top 2 primary ballot in particular.
This is a talk I gave for the first time at UPA Boston in May 2012. It's about a model I've been using to understand users for several years. What will you do with this tool?
Counter to intent: Voters' mental models of alternative counting methodsDana Chisnell
Here I talk about some preliminary findings from exploratory research about whether voters encounter problems using ballots that include contests that are counted in non-traditional ways.
California's top lessons learned in design and languageDana Chisnell
Introducing the Field Guides To Ensuring Voter Intent through an analysis of classic ballot design issues and the California top 2 primary ballot in particular.
This is a talk I gave for the first time at UPA Boston in May 2012. It's about a model I've been using to understand users for several years. What will you do with this tool?
1. Usability test of
ballot paper prototypes for
tablet -
design iterations
University of Baltimore
Drew Davies
Dana Chisnell
Kathryn Summers
Megan McKeever
November 11-14, 2012
23. Leads to
information
Information
about the
about
contest
marking the
ballot for
this contest
Position
statements
from the
candidates
Iteration 3 Removing most instructions and adding entry to supplemental content.
47. Iteration 3 Correcting the instructions on changing votes. Switching to “For” and
“Against.” The literature is unclear about whether it’s better than “Yes” and “No.”
70. Iteration 4,
scrolled down
(page 2)
Revelation! “Choices”
means there are still
more choices to make.
Wording changes both
in the title and the
button label.
71. Iteration 4,
scrolled down
(page 3)
The wording changes
and simple instructions
helped participants
understand the
purpose and use of
the Review.