Voting with (Little) Confidence

My interest level in this paper is a 9. I always think it is interesting to put what we have been learning into a real-life example–especially an example that is so relevant.

The three mains ideas of this paper were 1) We have a problem in the U.S. with our voting process 2) Electronic voting systems have the ability to solve this problem if done correctly and 3) Electronic voting systems may produce more harm than good if we do not design them correctly.

The paper relates to our class in that it talks about the importance of usability in design. Most relevantly, it addresses the issue of a large user group and how you must account for that in design. It also illustrates how crucial good design is.

I have two questions about this reading:

After reading about 5-user testing, I wondered how they preformed tests in the case of the EVS in order to account for such a diverse user group?

Ben Bederson discusses the error rate in using the EVS, but I wondered if there were also errors in paper voting?

My interest in this paper is a 9 because this is a very present issue with presidential elections just around the corner.

The three main points of this paper were that usability is a key issue in using a touch screen voting machine, security is not the only criteria for deciding if a voting machine should be used, and that errors caused by a lack of usability can even be the deciding factor of an important election.

This paper relates to our class by showing a concrete example of how usability can directly affect our lives. It stresses the importance of creating a usable design/ product.

Has the companies decided to change their designs for upcoming elections? Were there no confirmation pages, is that why the Florida congressional voters didn't know if their votes had been recorded? Confirmations can give people the chance to change their minds, which should be the main reason paper voting was ended, it was one punch and that was it. (Am I right about that?)