Improving Voting Systems’ User-Friendliness, Reliability, & Security

Q2 Social Sciences Behavioral Science and Policy Pub Date : 2017-04-01 DOI:10.1177/237946151700300103
M. Byrne
{"title":"Improving Voting Systems’ User-Friendliness, Reliability, & Security","authors":"M. Byrne","doi":"10.1177/237946151700300103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"About half of Americans have limited confidence that their vote will be properly counted. These fears have focused attention on voting system reliability, security, and usability. Over the last decade, substantial research on voting systems has demonstrated that many systems are less usable and secure than they should be. Producing truly reliable voting systems demands more than just following the federal guidelines enacted in 2005 (which, although well intentioned, have failed to substantially improve current systems) or simply updating voting systems to electronic voting computers using monies allocated by the 2002 Help America Vote Act (HAVA). In fact, HAVA has inadvertently led to the purchase of systems that may have actually increased the vote error rate. Key reforms needed to deliver reliable voting systems include substantial testing for usability especially regarding the accurate capture of voter intent and the reduction of voter error rates, and measures to ensure the integrity of elections, such as election officials’ ability to secure ballots.","PeriodicalId":36971,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Science and Policy","volume":"3 1","pages":"15 - 24"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral Science and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/237946151700300103","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

About half of Americans have limited confidence that their vote will be properly counted. These fears have focused attention on voting system reliability, security, and usability. Over the last decade, substantial research on voting systems has demonstrated that many systems are less usable and secure than they should be. Producing truly reliable voting systems demands more than just following the federal guidelines enacted in 2005 (which, although well intentioned, have failed to substantially improve current systems) or simply updating voting systems to electronic voting computers using monies allocated by the 2002 Help America Vote Act (HAVA). In fact, HAVA has inadvertently led to the purchase of systems that may have actually increased the vote error rate. Key reforms needed to deliver reliable voting systems include substantial testing for usability especially regarding the accurate capture of voter intent and the reduction of voter error rates, and measures to ensure the integrity of elections, such as election officials’ ability to secure ballots.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
改进投票系统的用户友好性、可靠性和安全性
大约一半的美国人对他们的选票会被正确计算的信心有限。这些担忧将注意力集中在投票系统的可靠性、安全性和可用性上。在过去的十年里,对投票系统的大量研究表明,许多系统的可用性和安全性不如应有的。生产真正可靠的投票系统需要的不仅仅是遵循2005年颁布的联邦指导方针(尽管初衷良好,但未能大幅改进现有系统),或者只是使用2002年《帮助美国投票法》(HAVA)分配的资金将投票系统更新为电子投票计算机。事实上,HAVA无意中导致购买的系统实际上可能增加了投票错误率。提供可靠投票系统所需的关键改革包括对可用性进行实质性测试,特别是在准确捕捉选民意图和降低选民错误率方面,以及确保选举完整性的措施,如选举官员确保选票安全的能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Behavioral Science and Policy
Behavioral Science and Policy Social Sciences-Development
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Hierarchy position & personality predict politicians’ choice of information sources Editor's note Election polls are 95% confident but only 60% accurate Penalties for Going Against Type: How Sexism Shapes Voters’ Perceptions of Candidate Character Leadership & overconfidence
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1