2018 U.S. state ballot measures
2019» «2017
Overview
Scorecard
Tuesday Count
Deadlines
Requirements
Lawsuits
Readability
Voter guides
Election results
Year-end analysis
Campaigns
Polls
Media editorials
Filed initiatives
Finances
Contributions
Signature costs
Ballot Measure Monthly
Signature requirements
Have you subscribed yet? Join the hundreds of thousands of readers trusting Ballotpedia to keep them up to date with the latest political news. Sign up for the Daily Brew. Click here to learn more.

This page provides an overview of the readability scores of theballot titles and summaries of ballot measures certified to go before voters in2018.

A readability score is an estimation of the reading difficulty of a text. Measurements used in calculating readability scores include the number of syllables, words, and sentences in a text. Other factors, such as the complexity of an idea in a text, are not reflected in readability scores.

In 2018,142 statewide ballot measures were certified for ballots. Voters in states with ballot measures read questions on their ballots asking them whether to approve or reject a measure. As the text of ballot measures is often multiple pages of statute or constitutional law, someone is tasked in each state with writing a shorter title and summary to appear on the ballot for the measures.

Readability index details

Ballotpedia uses two formulas, theFlesch Reading Ease (FRE) andFlesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), to compute scores for the titles and summaries of ballot measures. The FRE formula produces a score between a negative number and 100, with the highest score (100) representing a 5th-grade equivalent reading level and scores at or below zero representing college graduate-equivalent reading level. Therefore, the higher the score, the easier the text is to read. The FKGL formula produces a score equivalent to the estimated number of years of U.S. education required to understand a text. A score of five estimates that a U.S. 5th grade student would be able to read and comprehend a text, while a score of 20 estimates that a person with 20 years of U.S. formal education would be able to read and comprehend a text. Ballotpedia usesReadable.io to calculate the scores.

Learn more about these formulas in theformulas section below.

Overview

2018 highlights

To see the readability of individual certified measures,click here.

Analysis by state

Title and summary grades

Title and summary ease rating

Expand the table for Flesch Reading Ease averages by state by clicking [show] below.

Analysis by the author of ballot language

The person or office responsible for drafting the ballot language for statewide ballot measures varies by state. In some states, the ballot language for different types of measures is drafted by different persons or offices. Moreover, some states require collaboration. For example, the secretary of state might draft the language, but it requires approval by the attorney general.

Unique cases:

• ForOregon Measure 101, a veto referendum on the ballot in January, a legislative committee composed of three state representatives and three state senators was tasked to draft the referendum's ballot title and ballot summary—a task typically assigned to the attorney general. The bill calling for the committee to draft the language passed along partisan lines. Four Democrats and two Republicans were appointed to draft the ballot language, and veto referendum petitioners challenged the language, and, ultimately, it was altered by theOregon Supreme Court. Ultimately, the language had a Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level of 16, and the summary had a grade of 19.

• In Alaska, the ballot language for Measure 1 was drafted by theAlaska Lieutenant Governor. The measure had a ballot title Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level of 8, and the summary had a grade of 10.

• For theHawaii Constitutional Convention Question the ballot question was mandated by the constitutional provision requiring the question to be automatically referred to the ballot. The question has a Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level of 10.

Historical readability scores

Reilly and Richey (2011)

Political scientists Shauna Reilly and Sean Richeyconducted a study of 1,211 statewide ballot measures from 1997 to 2007 and concluded that more voters skipped voting on ballot measures when the titles and summaries were harder to read. To conduct the analysis, Reilly and Richey found the readability scores of the measures using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level formula. They found that:^[3]

• Oklahoma measures had the lowest average readability score at grade level 9.
• New Mexico measures had the highest average readability score at grade level 28.
• Colorado had both the highest score and lowest score for individual measures, with one at grade level 5 and one at grade level 95. Colorado had the second-highest level of variation in readability scores between measures.
• Only four states—Oklahoma, Connecticut, North Carolina, and South Dakota—had average readability scores equivalent to a high school grade level (9-12) in the U.S. All other states measured had scores above a high school grade level.

2017 ballot measures

See also:Ballot measure readability scores, 2017

In 2017, the average ballot question required 20 years of U.S. formal education (graduate school-level of education) to read and comprehend, according to theFlesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) formula. The FKGL scores of the 27 statewide ballot measures ranged from 7 to 42 years of formal U.S. education.

The ballot titles for the four initiatives on the ballot in 2017 had a lower mean FKGL score than titles for legislative referrals. The average score for initiatives was 14. The average score for legislative referrals was 23.

2018 readability scores

Formulas

TheFlesch Reading Ease andFlesch-Kincaid Grade Level formulas use the same variables and are inversely correlated, meaning that as one increases the other decreases.

Flesch Reading Ease

In the 1940s, Rudolf Flesch developed the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) test. TheU.S. Department of Defense uses the FRE to help craft its documents and manuals.^[11] The FRE computes a score based on the number of syllables, the number of words, and the number of sentences in a text. The FRE formula is as follows:^[12]

The FRE formula was designed to produce a score between 0 and 100, with the highest score (100) representing a 5th-grade equivalent reading level and the lowest score (0) representing college graduate-equivalent reading level. However, a score can be negative, representing increased difficulty. Therefore, the higher the score, the easier the text is to read. Rudolf Flesch created the following guide to interpreting FRE scores:^[12]

Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level

In 1975, J. Peter Kincaid recalculated FRE to give a score in the form of a U.S. school grade level for use by the U.S. Navy. This new formula became known as the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) test. Like FRE, the FKGL computes a score based on the number of syllables, the number of words, and the number of sentences in a text. The FKGL formula is as follows:^[13]

The FKGL produces a score equivalent to the estimated number of years of education required to understand a text. A score of 9 estimates that a U.S. 9th grade student would be able to read and comprehend a text, while a score of 18 estimates that a person with 18 years of U.S. formal education would be able to read and comprehend a text.^[3]

Limitations

As the FRE and FKGL, along with other readability tests, do not measure the difficulty or complexity of the ideas expressed in ballot measure titles and summaries, they may underestimate or overestimate the ability of voters to comprehend a text. Political scientist Shauna Reilly, who utilizes readability indices in her research, noted their limitations, stating:^[11]

Prior research

Ballot Question Readability and Roll-off: The Impact of Language Complexity

In 2011, political scientists Shauna Reilly and Sean Richey published an article inPolitical Research Quarterly on research they conducted to answer the question of whether the difficulty or complexity of ballot measure language correlated with voters skipping voting on a ballot measure. The authors referred to voters casting ballots but skipping a ballot measure asvoter roll-off. To measure the difficulty or complexity of ballot measure language, Reilly and Richey calculatedFlesch-Kincaid Grade Level scores for 1,211 statewide ballot measures from 1997 to 2007. Reilly and Richey concluded that lower readability scores correlated with higher rates of voter roll-off. In their model accounting for state and year variations, Reilly and Richey only found one variable with a stronger influence on voter roll-off than readability—whether or not a ballot measure was on a primary election ballot compared to a special election ballot.^[3]

Reilly and Richey calculated the mean Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level score for each state, except Arkansas, Illinois, and West Virginia, with at least one ballot measure during the 10-year period from 1997 to 2007. The state with the highest mean score was New Mexico, which had a mean FKGL score of 28 years of education. The state with the lowest mean score was Oklahoma, which had a mean FKGL score of nine years of education. The following table is from Reilly and Richey's research and contains the number of ballot measures analyzed in each state, the mean, minimum, and maximum readability score of measures in each state, and the standard deviation of the readability scores for measures in each state:^[3][15]

See also

• 2018 ballot measures
• Ballot measure readability scores, 2017
• Ballot title

External links

• Readable.io

Additional reading

• Reilly, Shauna, and Sean Richey. "Ballot Question Readability and Roll-off: The Impact of Language Complexity."Political Research Quarterly 64, 1. (2011): 59-67.

Footnotes