22,657 research outputs found
Impact of universal design ballot interfaces on voting performance and satisfaction of people with and without vision loss
Since the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) in 2002 that addressed improvements to voting systems and voter access through the use of electronic technologies, electronic voting systems have improved in U.S. elections. However, voters with disabilities have been disappointed and frustrated, because they have not been able to vote privately and independently (Runyan, 2007). Voting accessibility for individuals with disabilities has generally been accomplished through specialized designs, providing the addition of alternative inputs (e.g., headphones with tactile keypad for audio output, sip-and-puff) and outputs (e.g., audio output) to existing hardware and/or software architecture. However, while the add-on features may technically be accessible, they are often complex and difficult for poll workers to set up and require more time for targeted voters with disabilities to use compared to the direct touch that enable voters without disabilities to select any candidate in a particular contest at any time.
To address the complexities and inequities with the accessible alternatives, a universal design (UD) approach was used to design two experimental ballot interfaces, namely EZ Ballot and QUICK Ballot, that seamlessly integrate accessible features (e.g., audio output) based on the goal of designing one voting system for all. EZ Ballot presents information linearly (i.e., one candidate’s name at a time) and voters can choose Yes or No inputs that does not require search (i.e., finding a particular name). QUICK Ballot presents multiple names that allow users to choose a name using direct-touch or gesture-touch interactions (e.g., the drag and lift gesture). Despite the same goal of providing one type of voting system for all voters, each ballot has a unique selection and navigation process designed to facilitate access and participation in voting.
Thus, my proposed research plan was to examine the effectiveness of the two UD ballots primarily with respect to their different ballot structures in facilitating voting performance and satisfaction for people with a range of visual abilities including those with blindness or vision loss. The findings from this work show that voters with a range of visual abilities were able to use both ballots independently. However, as expected, the voter performance and preferences of each ballot interface differed by voters through the range of visual abilities. While non-sighted voters made fewer errors on the linear ballot (EZ Ballot), partially-sighted and sighted voters completed the random access ballot (QUICK Ballot) in less time. In addition, a higher percentage of non-sighted participants preferred the linear ballot, and a higher percentage of sighted participants preferred the random ballot.
The main contributions of this work are in: 1) utilizing UD principles to design ballot interfaces that can be differentially usable by voters with a range of abilities; 2) demonstrating the feasibility of two UD ballot interfaces by voters with a range of visual abilities; 3) providing an impact for people with a range of visual abilities on other applications. The study suggests that the two ballots, both designed according to UD principles but with different weighting of principles, can be differentially usable by individuals with a range of visual abilities. This approach clearly distinguishes this work from previous efforts, which have focused on developing one UD solution for everyone because UD does not dictate a single solution for everyone (e.g., a one-size-fits-all approach), but rather supports flexibility in use that provide a new perspective into human-computer interaction (Stephanidis, 2001).Ph.D
Public Evidence from Secret Ballots
Elections seem simple---aren't they just counting? But they have a unique,
challenging combination of security and privacy requirements. The stakes are
high; the context is adversarial; the electorate needs to be convinced that the
results are correct; and the secrecy of the ballot must be ensured. And they
have practical constraints: time is of the essence, and voting systems need to
be affordable and maintainable, and usable by voters, election officials, and
pollworkers. It is thus not surprising that voting is a rich research area
spanning theory, applied cryptography, practical systems analysis, usable
security, and statistics. Election integrity involves two key concepts:
convincing evidence that outcomes are correct and privacy, which amounts to
convincing assurance that there is no evidence about how any given person
voted. These are obviously in tension. We examine how current systems walk this
tightrope.Comment: To appear in E-Vote-Id '1
Vulnerability analysis of three remote voting methods
This article analyses three methods of remote voting in an uncontrolled
environment: postal voting, internet voting and hybrid voting. It breaks down
the voting process into different stages and compares their vulnerabilities
considering criteria that must be respected in any democratic vote:
confidentiality, anonymity, transparency, vote unicity and authenticity.
Whether for safety or reliability, each vulnerability is quantified by three
parameters: size, visibility and difficulty to achieve. The study concludes
that the automatisation of treatments combined with the dematerialisation of
the objects used during an election tends to substitute visible vulnerabilities
of a lesser magnitude by invisible and widespread vulnerabilities.Comment: 15 page
Building a Multimodal, Trust-Based E-Voting System
This paper addresses the issue of voter identification and authentication, voter participation and trust in the electoral system. A multimodal/hybrid identification and authentication scheme is proposed which captures what a voter knows – PIN, what he has – smartcard and what he is – biometrics. Massive participation of voters in and out of the country of origin was enhanced through an integrated channel (kiosk and internet voting). A multi-trust voting system is built based on service oriented architecture. Microsoft Visual C#.Net, ASP.Net and Microsoft SQL Server 2005 Express Edition components of Microsoft Visual Studio 2008 was used to realize the Windows and Web-based solutions for the electronic voting system
Millions to the Polls: Practical Policies to Fulfill the Freedom to Vote for All Americans
Voting is the bedrock of America's democracy. In a government of, by, and for the people, casting a ballot is the fundamental means through which we all have a say in the political decisions that affect our lives. Yet now, without substantial interventions, the freedom to vote is at great risk.This report contains a comprehensive and bold agenda of 16 policy proposals and common sense reforms. It details policies to help us realize the full promise of a democracy
Recommended from our members
Who counts and who is counted? Conversations around voting, access, and divisions in the disability community
Online voting platforms have been introduced in some locations as the solution to the many barriers to political participation that disabled people continue to face. Reading the experiences of disabled student voters on university campuses alongside broader trends in electoral reform taking place in jurisdictions across Canada allows us to attend to the dangerous ways in which conversations around access have been limited through virtual solutions that encourage the physical absence of disabled voters. This article situates these absences alongside other categories of exclusion–including groups who are formally disenfranchised–and recalls many unstated values that are active in shaping citizenship cultures. Probing online voting through a critical disability angle, we present a critique of techno-fixes that builds upon broader notions of accessibility and inclusion
Mergers and acquisitions in Germany: social setting and regulatory framework
The paper describes the legal and economic environment of mergers and acquisitions in Germany and explores barriers to obtaining and executing corporate control. Various cases are used to demonstrate that resistance by different stakeholders including minority shareholders, organized labour and the government may present powerful obstacles to takeovers in Germany. In spite of the overall convergence of European takeover and securities trading laws, Germany still shows many peculiarities that make its market for corporate control distinct from other countries. Concentrated share ownership, cross shareholdings and pyramidal ownership structures are frequent barriers to acquiring majority stakes. Codetermination laws, the supervisory board structure and supermajority requirements for important corporate decisions limit the execution of control by majority shareholders. Bidders that disregard the German preference for consensual solutions and the specific balance of powers will risk their takeover attempt be frustrated by opposing influence groups. Revised version forthcoming in "The German Financial System", edited by Jan P. Krahnen and Reinhard H. Schmidt, Oxford University Press
- …