Why the article is helpful
- Discusses the methods used to establish test protocols and pass/fail benchmarks for evaluating accessible voting systems.
- Proposes two new metrics for assessing whether a voting system is acceptable for use by voters with disabilities: time to vote and number of interactions
- Showed that use of assistive technology can increase the effort needed to cast a ballot by increasing the number of physical interactions.
The use of accessible technologies was shown to significantly increased the amount of time and physical interactions (e.g. button or screen presses) required to mark and cast a vote, increasing the chance of fatiguing the voter. The addition of these two metrics (time to vote and number of interactions) would ensure that individuals with disabilities are able to vote using accessible systems under reasonable conditions.
Additional Details
The accessibility of a voting system for certification is determined by its conformance to the requirements in the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG). Without any provisions for performance-based metrics, a system’s level of accessibility cannot be currently measured or quantified.
Researchers at Michigan State University (under a NIST research grant) worked to develop an appropriate test protocol to be used by Voting System Test Laboratories (VSTL) for conformance testing of accessible voting systems.
Building upon NIST’s previous research on usability testing for accessible voting systems, the test protocol was designed to assess whether voters with disabilities could accurately and comfortably vote on accessible systems. As usability testing with voters with disabilities was outside the scope of the study, researchers relied on expert timings and performance benchmarks to create pass/fail metrics to be used by VSTL for certification purposes. In addition to creating benchmarks for total completion score, voter inclusion index, and perfect ballot index, researchers recommended the inclusion of two additional metrics: time to vote and number of interactions.
Links to articles
Swierenga, S, and Pierce, G, L. (2013) Accessible Voting System Usability Measures. 28th Annual International Technology and Persons with Disabilities Conference Scientific/Research Proceedings, San Diego, 2013
Swierenga, S. J., & Pierce, G. L. (2013). Testing Usability Performance of Accessible Voting Systems. Poster presentation at the EAC/NIST Accessible Voting Technology Research Workshop. Gaithersburg, MD: Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology. April 1, 2013
Swierenga, S. J., & Pierce, G. L. (2012). Testing Usability Performance of Accessible Voting Systems: Final Report. National Institute of Standards and Technology. Contract # SB1341-10-SE-0985. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, Usability/Accessibility Research and Consulting.
Swierenga, S. J., & Pierce, G. L. (2012, March 28). Supplement to Testing Usability Performance of Accessible Voting Systems: User Interface Issues Mapped to Specific Systems. National Institute of Standards and Technology. Contract # SB1341-10-SE-0985. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, Usability/Accessibility Research and Consulting.
Swierenga, S. J., Pierce, G. L., Quesenbery, W., Vanderheiden, G. C., Seleski, P. A. (2011). Testing Usability Performance of Voting Systems: Screening, Background, and Post-Study Question Bank. National Institute of Standards and Technology. Contract # SB1341-10-SE-0985. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, Usability/Accessibility Research and Consulting.
Swierenga, S. J., Pierce, G. L., Quesenbery, W., Seleski, P. A., & Vanderheiden, G. C. (2010).Testing Usability Performance of Voting Systems: Reference Questionnaires. National Institute of Standards and Technology. Contract # SB1341-10-SE-0985. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, Usability/Accessibility Research and Consulting.