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-boun...@lists.electorama.com > [mailto:election-methods-boun...@lists.electorama.com] On > Behalf Of Steve Wolfman > Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 8:53 PM > To: election-meth...@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 > ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info