Ballot Readability and Plain Language

<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>

Name thesis:degree_name

Master of Arts in Professional Writing (MAPW)

Level thesis:degree_level

Capstone

Discipline thesis:degree_discipline

English

Year dc:date.available

2019

Author dc:creator

• Poole, Roger

Contributors dc:contributor

• Dr. Sergio Figueiredo
• Dr. Erin Bahl

• Readability
• Plain Language
• Direct Democracy
• Voter Ballots
• Language and Literacy Education
• Reading and Language

Repository record dc:identifier

https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/mapw_etd/61

OAI identifier oai:identifier

oai:digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu:mapw_etd-1066