Implications of Graphics on Usability and Accessibility for the Voter

  • Benjamin Smith
  • Sharon Laskowski
  • Svetlana Lowry
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5767)


This paper explores the impact of graphics on the usability and accessibility of voting systems. Graphical elements, as part of voting systems, include both photographs and party logos that indicate specific candidates or political parties, informational icons such as arrows and alert symbols, and animations or other video. After an overview of the history of graphics on ballots, usability and accessibility issues concerning graphics are discussed in detail. The question of whether certain types of graphics would help people with cognitive disabilities vote is then considered in light of research and best practices for usability and accessibility.


Accessibility Animation Ballots Graphics Icons Logos Usability Voter Interface Voting System 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Argersinger, P.H.: New Perspectives on Election Fraud in the Gilded Age. Political Science Quarterly 100(4) (1985)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baker, P.M.A., Roy, R.G.B., Moon, N.W.: Getting Out the Vote: Assessing Technological, Social and Process Barriers to (e)Voting for People with Disabilities. In: The Twenty-Seventh Annual APPAM Research Conference, Washington, DC (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ballew, C.C., Todorov, A.: Predicting political elections from rapid and unreflective face judgments. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104(46), 17948–17953 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    BBC News. Brazil’s vote – fast but fiddly. BBC News (October 7, 2002), (retrieved July 18, 2008)
  5. 5.
    Darcy, R., Schneider, A.: Confusing Ballots, Roll-Off, and the Black Vote. The Western Political Quarterly 42(3), 347–364 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Design for Democracy. Effective Designs for the Administration of Federal Elections (2007), (retrieved July 25, 2008)
  7. 7.
    Dubner, S.J., Levitt, S.D.: Why Vote? The New York Times Magazine, (November 6, 2005), (retrieved July 24, 2008)
  8. 8.
    Elections New Zealand (2008) (web site),
  9. 9.
    Evans, E.C.: A History of the Australian Ballot System in the United States. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1917)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fernandes, T.: Global Interface Design: a Guide to Designing International User Interfaces. Academic Press Inc., Boston (1995)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Goodrich, M.: 19th Century Ballots from California (2004), (retrieved June 23, 2008)
  12. 12.
    Heller, S.: To the Letter Born. Campaign Stops: Strong Opinions on the 2008 Campaign. The New York Times (April 2, 2008), (retrieved June 24, 2008)
  13. 13.
    Heller, S.: McCain’s Optimum Look. Campaign Stops: Strong Opinions on the 2008 Campaign. The New York Times (April 21, 2008), (retrieved June 24, 2008)
  14. 14.
    Herrnson, P.S., Niemi, R.G.: Beyond the Butterfly Ballot: The Complexity of U. S. Ballots. Perspectives on Politics 1, 317–326 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Herrnson, P.S., Niemi, R.G., Hanmer, M.J., Bederson, B.B., Conrad, F.C., Traugott, M.W.: Voting Technology: The Not-So-Simple Act of Casting a Ballot. Brookings Institution Press, Washington (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jiwani, K.: Designing for users with Cognitive Disabilities (2001), (retrieved July 24, 2008)
  17. 17.
    Kang, H., Plaisant, C., Shneiderman, B.: New approaches to help users get started with visual interfaces: multi-layered interfaces and integrated initial guidance. In: Proceedings of the 2003 annual conference on Digital government research. ACM, Boston (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kantor, D.: Alzheimer’s disease and Dementia. Medline Plus Medical Encyclopedia (2006), and (retrieved July 21, 2008)
  19. 19.
    Kanwisher, N., McDermott, J., Chun, M.M.: The Fusiform Face Area: A Module in Human Extrastriate Cortex Specialized for Face Perception. The Journal of Neuroscience 17(11), 4302–4311 (1997)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kroeger, A.: Film of Zimbabwe ‘vote-rigging.’ BBC News (July 5, 2008), (retrieved July 18, 2008)
  21. 21.
    Lewis, R.A.: Mental retardation. Medline Plus Medical Encyclopedia (2007), (retrieved July 8, 2008)
  22. 22.
    Marshall, A.: Web Design for Dyslexic Users. Downloaded (2007) (July 23, 2008),
  23. 23.
    National Institute of Mental Health. The Numbers Count: Mental Disorders in America (2008), (retrieved July 21, 2008)
  24. 24.
    National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. Stroke: Hope Through Research (NIH Publication No. 99-2222), (retrieved July 21, 2008)
  25. 25.
    National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. Traumatic Brain Injury: Hope Through Research (NIH Publication No. 02-2478), (retrieved July 21, 2008)
  26. 26.
    Nielsen, J.: Designing Web Usability. New Riders Publishing, Indianapolis (2000)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Norman, D.A.: The Psychology of Everyday Things. Basic Books, New York (1988)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Oregon Secretary of State. Voters’ pamphlet. Volume 2 – candidates (2004), (retrieved July 25, 2008)
  29. 29.
    Oregon Secretary of State. Voters’ Pamphlets distributed Across Oregon (Press Releaease) (October 12, 2006), (retrieved July 25, 2008)
  30. 30. You’re Kidding Yourself if You Think Those Things Don’t Matter. Message posted anonymously to (July 1, 2008),
  31. 31.
    Pastor, P.N., Reuben, C.A.: Attention deficit disorder and learning disability: Unites States, 1997-98. Vital and Health Statistics 10, 206 (2002)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Redish, J.: Guidelines for Writing Clear Instructions and Messages for Voters and Poll Workers (2006), (retrieved July 23, 2008)
  33. 33.
    Reynolds, A., Steenbergen, M.: How the world votes: The political consequences of ballot design, innovation, and manipulation. Electoral Studies 25, 570–589 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Schur, L., Shields, T., Kruse, D., Schriner, K.: Enabling Democracy: Disability and Voter Turnout. Political Research Quarterly 55(1), 167–190 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Scott, J.S.: Plain Language: Adding Simplicity to Voting (2008), (retrieved July 22, 2008)
  36. 36.
    Selker: The Technology of Access: Allowing People of Age to Vote for Themselves. McGeorge Law Review 39(4), 1113–1137 (2007)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Serra, M., Muzio, J.: The IT Support for Acquired Brain Injury Patients – the Design and Evaluation of a New Software Package. In: Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences (2002)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Shneiderman, B.: Promoting universal usability with multi-layer interface design. In: ACM SIGCAPH Computers and the Physically Handicapped, pp. 73–74 (2002)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Shneiderman, B., Plaisant, C.: Designing the user interface: strategies for effective human-computer interaction, 4th edn. Pearson Education, Boston (2005)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Smith, B.: RNC fights use of elephant logo. Politico (July 17, 2008), (retrieved July 17, 2008)
  41. 41.
    Smithsonian National Museum of American History. Vote: the Machinery of Democracy (2004), (retrieved June 23, 2008)
  42. 42.
    Tanielian, T.L., Jaycox, L.: Invisible wounds of war: psychological and cognitive injuries, their consequences, and services to assist recovery. RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA (2008)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Todorov, A., Mandisodza, A.N., Goren, A., Hall, C.C.: Inferences of Competence from Faces Predict Election Outcomes. Science 308, 1623–1626 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    WebAIM. Cognitive Disabilities (2008), (retrieved July 8, 2008)
  45. 45.
    Ware, C.: Information visualization: Perception for Design. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2004)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Galitz, W.: The Essential Guide to User Interface Design: An Introduction to GUI Design Principles and Techniques. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester (2007)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Willis, J., Todorov, A.: First Impressions: Making Up Your Mind After a 100-Ms Exposure to a Face. Psychological Science 17(7), 592–598 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Benjamin Smith
    • 1
  • Sharon Laskowski
    • 2
  • Svetlana Lowry
    • 2
  1. 1.Laboratory for Automation PsychologyUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA
  2. 2.National Institute of Standards and TechnologyGaithersburgUSA

Personalised recommendations