Original question:

Are you aware of any recommendations regarding the use of photographs and icons next to candidates' and parties names on ballot papers? Are there any studies suggesting that photographs and icons are useful to voters in general and to voters with cognitive disabilities in particular? 

Summary of responses:

Posted on 14 February 2007

Photograph and icons can be useful especially in situations where there is a high illiteracy rate, but their use needs to be accompanied by a significant voter information campaign in order to be meaningful. It is also important to remember that the use of photos and icons adds to the complexity and cost of ballot production and makes it more difficult to re-print ballot papers in case a candidate dies or is withdrawn because the EMB will need to receive and scan a new photograph instead of just adding another name. To combat at least part of the problem, it is important to allow sufficient time between the change of candidates and Election Day.
One way of facilitating the job of the EMB is to require candidates to provide electronic copies of images instead of the EMB having to scan pictures. But, in certain situations, this may create too high a hurdle for some candidates or political parties – thus risking effectively excluding contenders from the election.
And finally; to reduce the number of invalid votes and votes for candidates or parties the voter wasn’t intending to support, it could also be useful to use focus groups and test different designs on voters in time to change the design before Election Day.
To summarize: thorough planning and a close cooperation between the EMB, any technical advisors, ballot paper printers and pilot groups of voters are essential elements to reach a design which is user friendly as well as cost and time efficient. 

Replies were received with thanks from:

• Ron Gould
• Magnus Ohman
• Ronan McDermott 

Links to related resources:

Ballot Paper Design in ACE Encyclopaedia

Production of Ballot Papers in ACE Encyclopaedia 

Quote from the ACE Encyclopaedia on design of ballot papers:

"Electoral management bodies need to take into account a range of issues when designing the ballot paper. A general principle underpinning any design is that the simpler the ballot paper the more effective. Ballot paper design has an impact on two important aspects of the election process:

1. The ability of voters to understand the choices of candidates or parties running in the election and select their choice in a valid manner. Elements on the ballot paper such as party symbols, candidate photographs, a short description of the party's and/or candidate's goals, and clear instruction on the ballot paper as to the method of casting a valid vote will support this.

2. The accuracy of counting of votes. Poorly designed ballot papers, with, for example, small and closely aligned preference squares, can lead to voters' marks overlapping more than one square, with consequent dispute at the count over whether the voter is valid, and, if valid, which party or candidate the voter selected.  Two other factors that impact on the design of the ballot paper are:
       a; The cost of the design is a factor that needs to be considered.
       b; The flexibility of design – this is constrained by limitations of the electoral system and the definition of ballot layouts in legislation."

Individual responses in full below:

Photographs and icons can serve a very useful purpose especially in situations where there is a high illiteracy rate.  However the use of these on the ballot papers needs to be accompanied by a significant voter information initiative on the part of the parties and of the candidates themselves prior to voting day if the photo or icon is to be meaningful.  The body responsible for registration of candidates and parties should also have the power to reject  icons such as the national flag or national or religious symbols etc as well as those icons which duplicate others and could confuse the voter.  Where photographs are involved, clear guidelines as to size, colour, etc are needed. Consideration needs to be given to the value of having both a photograph and an icon on the same ballot.  Where the individual is the main focus, such as in presidental elections , only the photo may suffice.  In elections where there is a closed list, only party symbols may be needed, and in some cased both are useful to identify the person with his or her party. 

     While there are good reasons to include them on the ballot, the use of photos and icons adds to the complexity of ballot production as well as increasing the cost of ballot printing.

On a practical note, adding photographs to the ballot paper makes it more difficult to re-print the ballot papers in case a candidate dies or is withdrawn. This is since the EMB will need to receive and scan a photograph of the new candidate. This may seem trivial, but in elections with many candidates in for example many sub-Saharan countries, this can create a real headache for a cash-strapped EMB. This does not mean that including photographs is not a good thing, but it does mean that if they are included, you may wish to increase the period between the change of candidates deadline and election day.

Where electoral information systems have been created to capture data on political parties (including coalitions and alliances), party icons or symbols, candidates, constituencies and nominations, it becomes possible (and efficient) to consider database-driven desktop publishing solutions for ballot paper pre-production. The template for each ballot paper design can be pre-approved and, once the nominations are complete, the output of ballot paper designs can be highly automated.

This can reduce the lead time between close of nominations and ballot paper printing. Since time is often the scarcest resource, such savings in time repay the time and cost to create the information systems. The cost of such information systems can be further justified by additional benefits they bring - one example being the automatic confirmation of a candidate's eligibility - confirmation that they are registered in the constituency where they are contesting a seat.

All this assumes that the inclusion of candidate photographs and icons/symbols is a good thing. I feel that the party/independent candidate icon/symbol is generally a good thing (for reasons eloquently articulated by Ron Gould). I am less enthusiastic about the inclusion of candidate photographs - in many situations, this panders to the egos of the candidates rather than any significant assistance to the voter as they attempt to cast their ballot.

The EMB may require candidates to provide electronic copies of images, thus bypassing the costly and time-consuming scanning of photographs. However, in post-conflict or similar scenarios, this may be too high a hurdle for political parties - certainly, you don't want a situation where such a requirement becomes an obstacle to participation.

Close technical liaison between the EMB, any international technical advisors and the companies who will be printing ballot papers is essential to create an end-to-end system to design, populate, proof and approve ballot paper designs.