The Science of Effective Communication
We have done extensive research to find what works in voter outreach so you can feel confident in the materials you deliver to voters. Each piece of content in VoterCast is based upon findings from our own experiments, academic research, and applied solutions from the field. Here are some of the top insights that inform our VoterCast designs.
Simplicity is key
VoterCast materials use concise language with simple sentence structures and basic vocabulary. Plain language increases trust and makes your communication accessible, understandable, and easy to navigate. Plus, most people skim the messages they receive, so we want to make good use of voters' limited attention. Explore the evidence.
Less ambiguity
Simple text indicates why a message is relevant. At a glace, people who are voting by mail will know this message is for them.
Direct, clear language
Voters can act on information that is immediately understandable. They will see here that they can track their ballot like they commonly do with packages.
Demonstrating credibility
Every communication in VoterCast reinforces the credibility of your office to deliver information that voters can trust. The messages are informative, nonpartisan, and explain to voters how to get support if needed. The visuals are designed to elevate the trusted messenger (you) by incorporating recognizable branding, like seals, consistent colors, and other markers that show that the message is from an official source. Explore the evidence.
Informative and useful
Giving voters information that's relevant and helpful demonstrates expertise and builds trust.
Being supportive
Inviting voters to reach out when they need help is assuring and improves voting outcomes.
Official cues
Seals and logos are easy way to indicate that the message is from an official source, giving voters a signal that the information is important.
Timeliness
We know that event-driven messages help capture voters' attention and create an occasion for people to act. The materials in VoterCast always highlight key dates or deadlines, making it clear to voters why a specific communication is relevant in that moment. We also offer recommendations for when to send specific communications to increase the likelihood that voters will act on the messages they receive. Explore the evidence.
A sense of urgency
Specific deadlines give voters a clear sense of when to act and mitigate procrastination.
Relevant prompts
Tying the moment to a specific action or piece of information helps voters navigate the voting process.
Anchoring
Displaying the date of the election serves as a useful reminder and helps orient the message for voters.
Salient call to action
VoterCast messages are designed to help voters easily follow through on the steps they need to take to successfully cast a ballot. These messages typically present a single call to action that is salient, compelling, and simple to act on. For more complex instructions, steps are broken out into manageable checklists, reducing voter confusion and the likelihood for procrastination. Explore the evidence.
Strong rationale
Justifying why a request is being made can compel voters to follow through.
Easy action
Visible and direct calls to action give clear instruction to voters. These actions should match the mode of deliver (e.g., direct links for email and other digital channels).
Offering help
Offering ways for people to get more information can mitigate uncertainty and distrust of the request.
Accessible to all
Effective voter outreach serves a diverse set of voters with different accessibility and language needs. The materials in VoterCast are designed to reach a wide audience and deliver information that removes barriers to participation. Visuals have large font and contrasting colors, messages are clear and supportive, and communications are offered across multiple channels to reach as many people as possible. And our AI-powered translation tool now enables instantaneous translations for the content you create in VoterCast. Explore the evidence.
Proper contrast
Using appropriate font and background colors will make your content readable for many more voters.
Language access
Translating your materials into multiple languages will ensure your messages reach a wide audience.
Explore the evidence
Simplicity is key
- ideas42. (2023). Official Communication with Voters Checklist. ideas42.org.
- Center for Civic Design. Field Guide: Writing instructions voters understand. Civicdesign.org.
- Center for Election Excellence. Plain language. ElectionExcellence.org.
- Godfrey, L. (2018, December 20). Designing for translation. Digital.gov.
- Faulkner, N., et al. (2019), "The INSPIRE Framework: How Public Administrators Can Increase Compliance with Written Requests Using Behavioral Techniques." Public Admin Rev, 79: 125-135.
- Redish, J. C., Chisnell, D. E., Newby, E., Laskowski, S. J., & Lowry, S. Z. (2008). Report of Findings: Use of Language in Ballot Instructions, NISTIR 7556.
- Mann, Christopher, et al. (2020). "Too Much Information? Undermining Mobilization Efforts with Information Burden about the Voting Process" Unpublished manuscript.
- Song, H., & Schwarz, N. (2008). If it's hard to read, it's hard to do: Processing fluency affects effort prediction and motivation. Psychological Science, 19(10), 986–988.
- Rennekamp, K. (2012). Processing fluency and investors’ reactions to disclosure readability. Journal of accounting research, 50(5), 1319-1354.
Demonstrating credibility
- ideas42. (2016). Graduating Students into Voters. ideas42.org.
- ideas42. (2020). Guide to Responding to Misinformation. Ideas42.org.
- Center for Civic Design. Field Guide: Choosing how to communicate with voters. Civicdesign.org.
- Linos, E., Lasky-Fink, J., Larkin, C., Moore, L., & Kirkman, E. (2024). The formality effect. Nature Human Behaviour, 8(2), 300-310.
- Suttmann-Lea, M., & Merivaki, T. (2023). The Impact of Voter Education on Voter Confidence: Evidence from the 2020 US Presidential Election. Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy, 22(2), 145-165.
- Kumkale, G. Tarcan, Dolores Albarracín, and Paul J. Seignourel. 2010. "The effects of source credibility in the presence or absence of prior attitudes: Implications for the design of persuasive communication campaigns." Journal of Applied Social Psychology 40 (6): 1325-1356.
- O'Keefe, Daniel J. (1987). "The persuasive effects of delaying identification of high-and low- credibility communicators: A meta‐analytic review." Communication Studies 38:63- 72.
- Sternthal, Brian, Lynn W Phillips, and Ruby Dholakia. 1978. "The persuasive effect of source credibility: A situational analysis." Public Opinion Quarterly 42 (3):285-314.
Timeliness
- ideas42. (2015). Increasing FAFSA Applications: Making college more affordable.
- ideas42. (2021). Increasing Property Tax Compliance: Encouraging timely payments with a behaviorally informed reminder letter.
- Center for Civic Design. (2017). Informed voters from start to finish.
- Suttmann-Lea, M., & Merivaki, T. (2022). Don't Drown the Message: The Effects of Voter Education on Mail Ballot Acceptance in North Carolina. Journal of Election Administration Research and Practice, 1(2).
- Panagopoulos, C. (2011). Timing is everything? Primacy and recency effects in voter mobilization campaigns. Political Behavior, 33, 79-93.
- Nickerson, D. W. (2007). Quality is job one: Professional and volunteer voter mobilization calls. American Journal of Political Science, 51(2), 269-282.
- Dan Ariely and Klaus Wertenbroch, “Procrastination, Deadlines, and Performance: Self-Control by Precommitment,” Psychological Science 13, no. 3 (2002): 219-224
Salient call to action
- ideas42. (2023). Official Communication with Voters Checklist. ideas42.org.
- ideas42. (2019). Reducing SNAP Churn in Massachusetts. ideas42.org.
- ideas42. (2016). Nudging for Success. Ideas42.org.
- Center for Civic Design. Field Guide: Creating forms that help voters take action. civicdesign.org.
- Center for Civic Design. Field Guide: Choosing how to communicate with voters. Civicdesign.org.
- Team, B. I. (2014). East. Four Simple Ways to Apply Behavioural Insights.
- Chojnacki, G., Deutsch, J., Amin, S., Perez-Johnson, I., Darling, M., & Lefkowitz, J. Pilot OSHA Citation Process Increases Employer Responsiveness (Brief). Mathematica Policy Research.
- Hales, B. M., & Pronovost, P. J. (2006). The checklist—a tool for error management and performance improvement. Journal of critical care, 21(3), 231-235.
Accessible to all
- Election Assistance Commission & Rutgers. (2024). Voting Experiences Since HAVA: Perspectives of People with Disabilities. eac.gov.
- Center for Civic Design. Field Guide: Creating accessible online information. civicdesign.org.
- Center for Civic Design. Field Guide: Planning language access. civicdesign.org.
- U.S. Census Bureau. (2022). Languages we speak in the United States. census.gov.
- ACLU. (2015). Access Denied: Barriers to Online Voter Registration for Citizens with Disabilities. aclu.org.
- Sanford, J. A., CATEA, G., Frances Harris, C. A. T. E. A., Tech, G. A., Yang, H. Y., Bell, C. J., ... & Andrew Baranak, G. T. R. I. (2013). Understanding voting experiences of people with disabilities. The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, Accessible Voting Technology Initiative Working Paper Series.