1

Table of Contents
1. Introduction...................................................................................... 3
● Persona Creation
2. A heuristic evaluation of the interactive prototype provided Normal Nielsen…8
3. Work Domain Analysis.................................................................. 14
3.1 Cast an e-Vote remotely
3.1.1 Abstraction Hierarchy
3.2 Independently verify (audit) the authenticity of a batch of casted votes)
3.2.1 Abstraction Hierarchy
4. Interaction Design and Information Visualisation Recommendation 18
4.1 Table showing ‘Cast an e-Voting Remotely’ and Independently verify (audit)
the authenticity of a batch of cased votes)
5. Cultural Differences....................................................................... 21
5.1 Impact of Cultural Differences on the Process and Product of Interaction
Design
5.2 Discussion on individualism in the Indian Contexts
5.3 Discuss on Power Distance in the Indian Context
● Hofstede Diagram
6. Conclusion........................................................................................23
6.1 Summary of the Human-Centred Strategy for the E-Voting App
6.2 Importance of considering WDA, Cultural Differences, and design
recommendation
7. References........................................................................................ 25

2
 1.Introduction
This document provides a comprehensive evaluation of the e-voting system designed
for Hargreaves Lansdown. The primary objective of this module is to critically assess
the interactive prototype using a heuristic evaluation framework established by the
Norman Nielsen Group. The evaluation aims to identify usability issues and propose
actionable recommendations to enhance the system's overall user experience.
In this report, we begin with a detailed heuristic evaluation, highlighting key findings and
suggestions for improvements. This section captures the feedback provided by
evaluators and incorporates recommendations to address identified usability
challenges. Following the heuristic evaluation, Section 3 focuses into an in-depth
examination of the work domain. This section offers insights into the context in which
the e-voting system operates, providing a foundational understanding necessary for
tailoring the system to user needs.Subsequent sections provide targeted
recommendations for interaction design and information visualisation. These
recommendations are aimed at optimising user engagement and ensuring that the
system is both intuitive and accessible to a diverse user base.The report concludes with
an exploration of the cultural considerations involved in implementing the e-voting app
in India. This analysis is crucial for understanding the potential challenges and

3
adaptations required to ensure the system's success in a different cultural context. By
addressing these various aspects, the report aims to provide a holistic view of the
e-voting system's usability and its potential for broader application.

Persona Creation: To ensure the e-voting app meets the needs of its diverse user
base, we created detailed personas representing different segments of potential users.
These personas guided the design process by providing insights into user behaviors,
needs, and preferences.
Persona 1: Users with no major accessibility of resource constraints

Figure 1: Persona

Persona 2: Users with accessibility challenges such as impaired vision, mobility or cognition
challenges.

4
Figure 2: Persona

Persona 3: User with Limited Access to Digital Platforms

5
 Figure 3: Persona

Persona 4: Election Auditor

6
Figure 4: Persona

2.A heuristic evaluation of the interactive prototype

provided Normal Nielsen

Nielsen Norman Group

7
Heuristic
Evaluation
Workbook

Visibility of System Status

The design should always keep

users informed about what is
going on, through appropriate
feedback within a reasonable
amount of time.

Does the design

clearly communicate
its state?
Is feedback presented quickly
after user actions?

Match Between System

and the Real World

The design should speak the users'

language. Use words, phrases, and
concepts familiar to the user, rather
than internal jargon. Follow
real-world conventions, making
information appear in a natural and
logical order.

Will users be familiar with the

terminology used in the design?
Do the design’s controls
follow real-world
conventions?

8
 User Control and Freedom

Users often perform actions by

mistake. They need a clearly
marked "emergency exit" to leave
the unwanted action without
having to go through an extended
process.

Does the design allow users

to go back a step in the
process?
Are exit links easily
discoverable? Can users easily
cancel an action? Is Undo and
Redo supported?

Consistency and Standards

Users should not have to

wonder whether different words,
situations, or actions mean the
same thing.
Follow platform and industry
conventions.

Does the design follow

industry conventions?
Are visual treatments used
consistently throughout the design?

9
Error Prevention

Good error messages are

important, but the best designs
carefully prevent problems from
occurring in the first place.
Either eliminate error-prone
conditions, or check for them
and present users with a
confirmation option before they
commit to the action.

Does the design prevent slips by

using helpful constraints?
Does the design warn users
before they perform risky actions?

Recognition Rather
Than Recall

Minimize the user's memory load

by making elements, actions, and
options visible. The user should
not have to remember information
from one part of the interface to
another. Information required to
use the design (e.g. field labels or
menu items) should be visible or
easily retrievable when needed.

Does the design keep important

information visible, so that users
do not have to memorize it?
Does the design offer
help in-context?

10
Flexibility and
Efficiency of Use

Shortcuts — hidden from novice

users — may speed up the
interaction
for the expert user such that the
design can cater to both
inexperienced and experienced
users. Allow users to tailor frequent
actions.

Does the design provide

accelerators like keyboard
shortcuts and touch
gestures?
Is content and funtionality
personalized or customized for
individual users?

Aesthetic and
Minimalist Design

Interfaces should not contain

information that is irrelevant or
rarely needed. Every extra unit of
information in an interface competes
with the relevant units of
information and diminishes their
relative visibility.

Is the visual design and content

focused on the essentials?
Have all distracting,
unnescessary elements been
removed?

11
Help Users Recognize,
Diagnose, and Recover
from Errors

Error messages should be

expressed in plain language (no
error codes), precisely indicate
the problem, and constructively
suggest a solution.

Does the design use traditional

error message visuals, like bold,
red text?
Does the design offer a solution
that solves the error immediately?

Help and Documentation

It’s best if the system doesn’t

need any additional explanation.
However, it may be necessary to
provide documentation to help
users understand how to
complete their tasks.

Is help documentation easy

to search?
Is help provided in context right
at the moment when the user
requires it?

12
 3.Work Domain Analysis
3.1 Cast an e-Vote Remotely
The ability to cast an e-vote remotely is a fundamental aspect of modern e-voting systems,
designed to provide convenience, accessibility, and security for voters. This section breaks
down the process and components involved in remote e-voting through an abstraction
hierarchy.
3.1.1 Abstraction Hierarchy
An abstraction hierarchy is a framework used to analyse the work domain by breaking it down
into various levels of abstraction. For the task of casting an e-vote remotely, the abstraction
hierarchy can be described as follows:

Figure 5. Flowchart for abstract hierarchy

13
Detailed view:

1. Functional Purpose
● Objective: Enable users to cast their votes remotely in a secure, accessible, and
user-friendly manner.
● Performance Criteria: Ensure accuracy, security, user satisfaction, and compliance with
legal standards.
2. Abstract Function
● Function: Facilitate the secure transmission and receipt of votes from remote users.
● System Principles: Data encryption, user authentication, real-time feedback, and error
prevention.
3. Generalised Function
Processes:
● User Authentication: Verifying the identity of the voter using secure methods (e.g.,
biometrics, passwords, two-factor authentication).
● Ballot Selection: Allowing users to select their choices from a list of candidates or
options.
● Vote Submission: Ensuring the secure transmission of the vote to the central server.
● Confirmation: Providing immediate feedback that the vote has been successfully
submitted and recorded.
4. Physical Function
Components:
● User Interface: Web or mobile interface for vote casting.
● Authentication Mechanisms: Password fields, biometric scanners, etc.
● Voting System Backend: Servers and databases that handle vote storage and
processing.
● Security Protocols: Encryption software, secure sockets layer (SSL), etc.
5. Physical Form
Hardware and Software:
● User Devices: Computers, smartphones, tablets.
● Network Infrastructure: Internet connectivity.
● Backend Servers: Centralised servers managing the voting process.

14
 ● Software Applications: Voting application interface, encryption software, authentication
services.

3.2 Independently verify (audit) the authenticity of a batch of casted votes

3.2.1 Abstraction Hierarchy

The process of independently verifying the authenticity of a batch of cast votes is essential for
maintaining the trust and integrity of the voting process. This section details the abstraction
hierarchy for this process.

15
Figure 6: Flowchart for abstract hierarchy
Detailed view:

1. Functional Purpose
● Objective: Ensure the integrity and authenticity of the voting process by providing
auditors with the tools and data necessary to detect any irregularities or discrepancies.
● Performance Criteria: Accuracy, security, transparency, reliability, and adherence to
auditing standards.

16
 2. Abstract Function
● Function: Facilitate the secure and accurate verification of cast votes to uphold the
integrity of the electoral process.
● System Principles: Data encryption, independent verification, anomaly detection, secure
access protocols, and comprehensive reporting.
3. Generalised Function
Processes:
● Data Collection: Gather encrypted voting data for a specific batch of cast votes.
● Cryptographic Verification: Use cryptographic methods to verify the authenticity of each
vote.
● Anomaly Detection: Analyse voting data to identify any discrepancies or irregularities.
● Secure Access: Implement protocols to ensure that only authorised auditors can access
the voting data.
● Reporting: Generate detailed audit reports that document the findings and highlight any
issues detected.
4. Physical Function
Components:
● Audit Interface: Provide auditors with user-friendly tools and interfaces to access and
analyse vote data.
● Cryptographic Tools: Software for performing cryptographic verification of votes.
● Data Analytics: Systems for analysing voting data and detecting anomalies.
● Secure Access Mechanisms: Multi-factor authentication, encryption keys, and secure
login procedures.
● Reporting Tools: Software for generating comprehensive audit reports that are clear and
actionable.
5. Physical Form
Hardware and Software:
● Auditor Devices: Computers or workstations used by auditors, equipped with necessary
software tools.
● Network Infrastructure: Secure connectivity for accessing and transmitting voting data.
● Cryptographic Software: Applications for decrypting and verifying vote authenticity.
● Data Analysis Tools: Software for detailed analysis of voting patterns and detection of
anomalies.
● Reporting Software: Applications for compiling and presenting audit findings in a clear,
understandable format.
17
4. Interaction Design and Information Visualisation
Recommendation
4.1 Table showing ‘Cast an e-Voting Remotely’ and Indepently verify (audit)
the authenticity of a batch of cased votes)

Task Casting an e-voting remotely Independently verify(audit)

the authenticity of the casted
votes

Usability Effectiveness, Learnability, Effectiveness, utility, safety

Memorability, Safety
Goals

User
Satisfying, Helpful
Experience Satifying, Engaging

Goals

Interaction Clear Instruction, Comprehensive tools for data

Minimalistic design, access, decryption and analysis
Design Consistent Navigation

Information Progress bar, Secure data visualisation,

confirmation messages, anomaly detection indicators,
Visualisation accessible design options audit trails

Figure 7: Table

E-voting prototype schematic:

18
Screen 1: Main Menu
Options Available:
19
Speech to Text: Allows users to input text using their voice, enhancing accessibility for those who have
difficulty typing.
Colour Blind Mode: Adjusts the color scheme to accommodate users with color vision deficiencies,
ensuring that all visual elements are distinguishable.
Tutorials: Provides instructional content to guide users through the voting process.
Contact Us: Offers a way for users to reach out for support or additional help.
Home: Navigates back to the main home screen of the app.
Accessibility Icon: A music note icon in the bottom right corner, possibly indicating an option to enable
or disable audio feedback or instructions.

Screen 2: Audio/Video Tutorials

Content:
How to Cast Your Vote: A video tutorial explaining the steps involved in casting a vote.
Guide: Another video providing guidance on using the app or voting process.
Navigation:
Back Button: Located at the bottom, allowing users to return to the previous screen.

Screen 3: Additional Features for Accessibility

Braille Screen Input: A feature enabling users to input text using a Braille keyboard or interface,
catering to visually impaired users who read Braille.
Ethical Tech: Possibly a section providing information on ethical technology practices within the app or
voting process.
Brightness Adjustment: An option to adjust screen brightness, making the app more usable in various
lighting conditions.

Navigation:
Back Button: Located at the bottom for returning to the previous screen.

Screen 4: User Input Form

Form Fields:

20
Enter Your Details: Likely a registration or login form requiring the user to enter personal details such
as name, address, or identification number.
Buttons:
Submit Button: An icon (potentially a person) to submit the entered details.
Back Button: Located at the bottom to navigate back to the previous screen.
General Features and Navigation
Accessible Design: Each screen includes features and navigation options designed to be user-friendly
for individuals with visual impairments, such as Braille input, speech-to-text, and color adjustments.
Consistent Navigation: Back buttons on each screen ensure users can easily navigate the app without
getting lost.
Audio/Visual Feedback: Icons like the music note suggest the inclusion of audio feedback to assist
users who rely on auditory instructions.

5.Cultural Differences
5.1 Impact of Cultural Differences on the Process and Product
of Interaction Design
Cultural differences significantly impact the design and usability of interactive systems. Understanding
these differences helps tailor products to meet the needs and expectations of diverse user groups. For
instance, high-context cultures might prefer more detailed and contextually rich interfaces, while
low-context cultures might favour straightforward and minimalistic designs. This section examines how
cultural variations influence both the design process and the final product, ensuring that the e-voting
system is accessible and user-friendly across different cultural contexts

5.2 Discussion on individualism in the Indian Contexts

India scores low on Hofstede’s individualism dimension, indicating a collectivist society where group
harmony and loyalty are paramount. This cultural context has several design implications for the
e-voting system:

Community-Centric Features: Incorporate features that support group interactions and

decision-making. For instance, allowing users to discuss their choices with family or community
members within the app can enhance engagement.

Social Sharing Options: Design the interface to include options for sharing voting choices and related
information within social networks, which aligns with the collectivist nature of Indian society.

21
Endorsements and Recommendations: Utilise endorsements from community leaders or influencers to
guide users in making informed decisions. This can increase trust and acceptance of the system.

5.3 Discuss on Power Distance in the Indian Context

India has a high score on Hofstede’s power distance dimension, reflecting a societal acceptance of
hierarchical order and unequal power distribution. This cultural characteristic necessitates specific
design considerations:
Authoritative Guidance: Ensure the interface provides clear instructions and guidance from
authoritative figures or institutions. This could include tutorial videos or written guidance from
respected leaders.
Hierarchical Navigation: Design the user interface to reflect hierarchical structures, making it easier for
users to follow prescribed steps. This can be achieved through a step-by-step voting process with
clear, authoritative prompts at each stage.
Transparent Processes: Enhance user trust by clearly explaining the voting process, the security
measures in place, and how votes are counted. Providing transparency in the process helps users feel
more secure in their actions, especially in a high power distance context.
Support Channels: Include robust help and support channels that can be easily accessed. Offering
assistance from trusted authorities or support staff can help users navigate the system more
confidently.
All in all, Incorporating Hofstede’s cultural dimensions into the design of the e-voting system ensures it
is tailored to the specific needs and expectations of Indian users. By considering the low individualism
and high power distance scores, the design can include community-centric features, authoritative
guidance, and hierarchical navigation structures. These considerations will help create a user-friendly,
trustworthy, and culturally appropriate e-voting system.

22
Hofstede Diagram:

Figure 8: Hofstede Diagram

6. Conclusion
6.1 Summary of the Human-Centred Strategy for the E-Voting App
The development of the e-voting app has been guided by a human-centred strategy, focusing on the
needs, preferences, and limitations of its users. This approach ensures that the app is user-friendly,
accessible, and secure, thereby fostering trust and encouraging widespread adoption. Key elements of
the human-centred strategy include:

User Research and Personas: Conducting thorough user research to understand the diverse needs of
potential users, creating detailed personas to guide the design process.
Usability Testing: Iteratively testing the prototype with real users to identify and address usability
issues, ensuring the app is intuitive and easy to navigate.
Accessibility: Ensuring the app meets accessibility standards to accommodate users with disabilities,
including visual, auditory, and motor impairments.
Security and Privacy: Implementing robust security measures to protect user data and ensure the

23
integrity of the voting process.
Feedback Mechanisms: Incorporating features that allow users to provide feedback easily, enabling
continuous improvement based on user input.
These strategies collectively aim to create an e-voting app that is not only functional but also
resonates well with users, promoting a positive and inclusive voting experience.

6.2 Importance of considering WDA, Cultural Differences, and design

recommendation
Understanding and integrating Work Domain Analysis (WDA), cultural differences, and design
recommendations are crucial for the success of the e-voting app.

Work Domain Analysis (WDA):

Understanding Context: WDA helps in understanding the context in which the e-voting system will be
used, including the tasks, user goals, and the environment. This ensures that the app supports the
actual work users need to perform, such as registering to vote, verifying identity, and casting votes
securely.
Designing for Complexity: By analyzing the work domain, designers can anticipate and mitigate
potential complexities and challenges users may face, creating a more seamless and efficient voting
process.

Cultural Differences:

Cultural Sensitivity: Different cultures have varied expectations, behaviors, and interpretations of
design elements. Considering these differences ensures the app is culturally sensitive and accessible
to a diverse user base.
Localization: Customizing the app for different languages and cultural contexts enhances usability and
inclusiveness, making the app more user-friendly for people from various backgrounds.

Design Recommendations:

Heuristic Evaluation: Applying usability heuristics, such as those proposed by Nielsen Norman, helps
in identifying and fixing usability issues, ensuring the app is intuitive and easy to use.
User Control and Freedom: Providing users with control over their actions and easy ways to correct
mistakes enhances user confidence and satisfaction.
Error Prevention and Recovery: Designing the app to prevent errors and providing clear, helpful error
messages improves the overall user experience.
By integrating WDA, cultural considerations, and design best practices, the e-voting app can deliver a
secure, inclusive, and user-friendly experience, ultimately fostering higher engagement and trust in the
24
electronic voting process.

7. References
Nielsen Norman Group. (n.d.). 10 Usability Heuristics for User Interface Design. Retrieved from

https://www.nngroup.com/articles/ten-usability-heuristics/

ISO. (2019). ISO 9241-210:2019 Ergonomics of human-system interaction — Part 210:

Human-centred design for interactive systems. International Organization for Standardization.

Preece, J., Sharp, H., & Rogers, Y. (2015). Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction.

John Wiley & Sons.

Norman, D. A. (2013). The Design of Everyday Things: Revised and Expanded Edition. Basic Books.

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and

Organizations Across Nations. SAGE Publications.

Vicente, K. J. (1999). Cognitive Work Analysis: Toward Safe, Productive, and Healthy

Computer-Based Work. CRC Press.

25