MIT/ CALTECH/Carnegie : voting is worth technology
Ted Selker
MIT Media Laboratory
• Analysis and Engineering?
• Computers designed for tabulation and interaction
– Paper interfaces better and easier?
– not solve the problem with computers and networks?
• Reference Platform?
• Public Policy in a Digital age:
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
Perceptual
• Graphical
– View ability
• Color, contrast, size,
– Readability (this is)
• Distinctions, lack of distracters, experience
– Distinguishably (this is not that)
• Precognitive, cognitive,
• Feedback
– Proprioceptive feedback
50ms
– Social feedback
3 seconds
– Emotional feedback
30 + seconds
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
Cognitive Interface
• Short term memory 7 +- 2 ( in 2 d)
• Depth of information 2 or three
• The book that I bought with the other books proceeds…
• Recognition is better than Recall (except when the
stimulus is confusing “red” written in blue
•
syntactic, semantic
• Cognitive load, bored … overloaded
• Precognitive recognition issues
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
Cognitive Styles
•
•
•
•
Verbal/ Visual
Procedural/Conceptual
Myers Briggs
Physical, perceptual, psychological, neurological
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
•
•
•
•
•
Obvious Design problems..
Distinguish ability
– Ambiguity, mislabel
– Alignment
– Viewable height
– Poor audio, labeling on audio (1 …. To select gore 2…. to select Bush )
Effects
– Button association
– Button not viewable
Feedback and Side effects
– Action
– Undo … action symmetry?
– Visual
(x not counted)
– Completion
Validation
– counted
Mechanical
–
–
–
–
Difficult to pull, push, turn grab or reach
Parallax,
Dexterity, accuracy,
Button pressure
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
Graphical interface mappings
Sec.
20
17.5
15
12.5
10
7.5
Day 1
5
2.5
0
T1
T2
T3
T4
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
Seeing it all: visualization
• Perspective and focus
• View ability-vs- procedure that is easy to follow
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
Perspective:
Orient and focus
Office: select one
with cursor or with touch
Candidate
Candidate
Candidate
Candidate
marked
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
Principled voting
•
•
•
•
•
No one is trustworthy
We make mistakes with unfamiliar things
Transcription is prone to error
Transportation is prone to error
Hard to make decisions without information
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
Eliminate people
• Immediate feedback
• No one person, organization, or mechanism in charge
• Personal Intentions matter:
• Consider , review and change their vote without coercion
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
Reference Platform: Brazil
• Electronic voting; 96, 98, 2000
– 96 Unisys
7% failure
– 98 Procomp
– 2000 Procomp .02% failure 106,000,000 votes
• Trusted Scientific organization
– Create requirements
• Trusted Technical organization
– Create reference platform
• Companies (5)
– Create demonstratable products for bid
• Government election officials
– Create open viewing and decision of vendor
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
Public Policy in a Digital age:
• Computational Platforms: Simulations, the rhetoric of the future?
• “Mosaic” of opinion and decision;
– Government,
– community,
– school,
– job,
– family,
– recreation,
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
Intentions
Learning by watching
•
•
•
•
Typing
Hand motion
Voiceprint
I look around
– Interest Tracker, Invision
• Eye aRe Personal gaze
– Looking for a sign?
- Robot seeks work as fuel tank inspector
Ballots:?
done
Orient and Focus
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT
• Mistakes
–
–
–
–
–
computer bugs,
electrical,
mechanical,
transcription,
transportation
Behavioral Interface issues
•
•
•
•
•
Goals
Constraints
Confidence
Motivation
Incentives
Ted Selker © 2001, MIT