IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/igg/jthi00/v13y2017i1p82-99.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Alternative Review Screen Design for Electronic Voting Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Danae V. Holmes

    (Rice University, Houston, TX, USA)

  • Philip Kortum

    (Rice University, Houston, TX, USA)

Abstract

Verifying a ballot for correctness in an election is a critical task for the voter. Previous work has shown that up to 30% of the ballot can be changed without being noticed by more than half of the voters. In response to this ballot weakness, this study evaluated the usability and viability of alternative ballot verification methods in an electronic voting medium. Three verification methods were tested: end-of-ballot, in-line confirmation, and dual confirmation. In-line and dual confirmation perform similarly to end-of-ballot confirmation in terms of effectiveness. The most efficient method is end-of-ballot review, and dual confirmation produced the longest time spent on the review screen. End-of-ballot confirmation produced the highest satisfaction ratings, though survey results indicated that dual confirmation may be the most appropriate method in terms of voting. Additional research in the field is the next step in exploring these confirmation methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Danae V. Holmes & Philip Kortum, 2017. "Alternative Review Screen Design for Electronic Voting Systems," International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction (IJTHI), IGI Global, vol. 13(1), pages 82-99, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:igg:jthi00:v:13:y:2017:i:1:p:82-99
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://services.igi-global.com/resolvedoi/resolve.aspx?doi=10.4018/IJTHI.2017010105
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:igg:jthi00:v:13:y:2017:i:1:p:82-99. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journal Editor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.igi-global.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.