The goal of this study was to examine the effect that readability and plain language had on voters' responses to Georgia's five legislatively-referred constitutional amendments (LRCA) in the November 2018 election. This study sought to answer the following questions regarding ballot readability and plain language:
Given that partisan lawyers and lobbyists write many state ballot questions, there may be tendencies to compose legislatively-referred constitutional amendments in confusing and unclear language designed to increase the likelihood of passage. Simplification of the language, wording, and clarity of legislatively-referred constitutional amendments may have the opposite effect of facilitating a \"no\" vote on these amendments.
","abstract_html":"<p>The goal of this study was to examine the effect that readability and plain language had on voters' responses to Georgia's five legislatively-referred constitutional amendments (LRCA) in the November 2018 election. This study sought to answer the following questions regarding ballot readability and plain language:</p> <ol> <li>Do voters distinguish the difference between traditionally composed ballots and plain language ballots?</li> <li>Do voters have a preference between conventional worded ballots and reworded ballot language that improved readability?</li> </ol> <p>Given that partisan lawyers and lobbyists write many state ballot questions, there may be tendencies to compose legislatively-referred constitutional amendments in confusing and unclear language designed to increase the likelihood of passage. Simplification of the language, wording, and clarity of legislatively-referred constitutional amendments may have the opposite effect of facilitating a "no" vote on these amendments.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Poole, Roger"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Master of Arts in Professional Writing (MAPW)","degree_level":"Capstone","degree_discipline":"English","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Dr. Sergio Figueiredo","Dr. Erin Bahl"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2019,"date_issued":"2019-12-17T08:00:00Z","date_published":"2019-12-17T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:43:33Z","subjects":["Readability","Plain Language","Direct Democracy","Voter Ballots","Language and Literacy Education","Reading and Language"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/mapw_etd/61","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Dr. Sergio Figueiredo","Dr. Erin Bahl"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Poole, Roger"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2019-12-11T08:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["English"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Capstone"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Arts in Professional Writing (MAPW)"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Readability","Plain Language","Direct Democracy","Voter Ballots","Language and Literacy Education","Reading and Language"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/mapw_etd/61"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The goal of this study was to examine the effect that readability and plain language had on voters' responses to Georgia's five legislatively-referred constitutional amendments (LRCA) in the November 2018 election. This study sought to answer the following questions regarding ballot readability and plain language:
Given that partisan lawyers and lobbyists write many state ballot questions, there may be tendencies to compose legislatively-referred constitutional amendments in confusing and unclear language designed to increase the likelihood of passage. Simplification of the language, wording, and clarity of legislatively-referred constitutional amendments may have the opposite effect of facilitating a \"no\" vote on these amendments.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Ballot Readability and Plain Language"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Dr. Sergio Figueiredo","Dr. Erin Bahl"],"dc:creator":["Poole, Roger"],"dc:date.available":["2019-12-11T08:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["The goal of this study was to examine the effect that readability and plain language had on voters' responses to Georgia's five legislatively-referred constitutional amendments (LRCA) in the November 2018 election. This study sought to answer the following questions regarding ballot readability and plain language:
Given that partisan lawyers and lobbyists write many state ballot questions, there may be tendencies to compose legislatively-referred constitutional amendments in confusing and unclear language designed to increase the likelihood of passage. Simplification of the language, wording, and clarity of legislatively-referred constitutional amendments may have the opposite effect of facilitating a \"no\" vote on these amendments.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/mapw_etd/61"],"dc:subject":["Readability","Plain Language","Direct Democracy","Voter Ballots","Language and Literacy Education","Reading and Language"],"dc:title":["Ballot Readability and Plain Language"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["English"],"thesis:degree_level":["Capstone"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Arts in Professional Writing (MAPW)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:43:33Z"}