Making Ballot Language Understandable to Voters

The wording and placement of instructions can help or hinder voters from successfully voting for their choices. No research has been done specifically on the language of instructions to voters, but we can draw best practices from research in several related disciplines. A recent study by the authors shows that typical ballots in the United States violate many of the best practices drawn from research. In this paper, we discuss and offer examples of the gap between best practice in giving instructions and the instructions that many voters see as they try to vote. We discuss the research on which we draw for these best practices and the need to study the applicability of this research in the specific context of voting instructions. Background: HAVA, NIST, and usability The 2002 Help America Vote Act (HAVA) assigns the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) a key technical role in assisting with nationwide improvements for voting systems. (See http://vote.nist.gov .) In particular, NIST provides research support to the Technical Guidelines Development Committee (TGDC) established by HAVA to develop voluntary voting system guidelines which are then delivered to the Election Assistance Commission. This paper describes some of NIST’s work improving the usability and accessibility of voting systems in response to the TGDC’s resolutions #08-05 Usability Guidance for Instructions, Ballot Design, and Error Messages and #06-05 Accommodating a Wide Range of Human Abilities. (See http://vote.nist.gov/Official%20w-o%20signature.pdf for the full text.) These resolutions recognize that all voting systems (not just the equipment designated as "accessible") must be designed for a large range of abilities. Voters may