View this PageEdit this PageUploads to this PageHistory of this PageHomeRecent ChangesSearchHelp Guide

Evaluation of Shocket, Peter A.

This publication does a remarkable job in treating the statistical data aquired from the study in the justification of a substantial difference between the various voting systems. The researchers took an objective approach to explain the disenfranchisement of voters in the punch-ballot systems and have made their audience privy to the severity of this disenfranchisement. They do not entirely rule out the punch-card voting method, in fact suggesting ways that it can be improved, however, they do delineate that these proposed improvements do have limitations and that they can sometimes further complicate the voting process because of the onerous nature of the revisions. I also like that the researchers addressed the limitations and unrealistic properties of their simulation and proposed future research ideas.

CONTRIBUTED BY stellar205


The experimental design of this study provides for many different causes for voter disenfranchisement. The wide spread approach allowed for a serious comparison between punch card, paper, and electronic voting systems. It points out the problems from a statistical standpoint. The scientific approach shows that there is a significant difference between voting systems. It gives specific problems based on numbers in all three systems. The researchers also sugest ways to make the experiment better so that it may be refined and make the voting system better.
CONTRIBUTED BY Ephraim