Uso de formularios durante los días de aplicación

From the moment the voting devices were deployed and the visualisations started appear- ing on the pavement, people became curious about what was happening. The observations revealed that the majority of people walking down the street noticed the visualisations, as evidenced by their glances, and many stopped to have a look. Shopkeepers also started notic- ing passers-by coming into their shop specifically to ask questions about the project. “As the

little stick people started appearing, I think people got more interested in finding out what was actually happening”, according to a volunteer at shop R1. Several shopkeepers commented on the

benefits they believed this had for them, including the shopkeeper at shop R1: “I think it is

probably actually beneficial to us, because people are curious, they see the little stick people and because we are one of the shops that has a box [i.e. voting device] they come in. And then they may buy something.”

The potential commercial benefits were also brought up by the owner of shop P9: “Those

people passing by, they stop and have a look, it’s an advantage, they look into the shop as well. It’s a win- win situation [ for the shop and the project]”. Passers-by and local residents also started explaining

the visualisations to one another. This behaviour was observed by the researchers in front of several participating shops. The owner of shop R2 noted: “There is always someone out there

explaining it to someone else”.

Similarly, the colourful buttons on the voting devices were found to catch the attention of people inside shops. Although reactions to the voting devices were mostly positive, two types of initial wariness towards the technology were observed. The first occurred at shop R3, one of the shops that is open until late in the evening. Two different customers inquired whether the voting devices were placed in the shop by the police. According to the shop- keeper the customers made this association because the shop is known for selling alcohol, and on rare occasions the police has had to intervene when people caused trouble due to exces- sive alcohol consumption. However, upon seeing the explanatory poster and hearing more about the project from the shopkeeper, both customers cast their votes. The second concern

Figure 4.10: Passers-by looking at and discussing the visualisations sprayed on the doorstep of the participating shops

was related to the function of the voting devices. A handful of people who had voted but were not convinced the voting device actually stored their vote. To convince these sceptical customers, at least two shopkeepers opened the device to show the technology (as one the shopkeeper of R6 put it: “I had to show them the wires!”). Similarly, some people were hes- itant to vote as they were wary of what the device might do: “They seem a bit worried about

pressing the buttons. They think they might get an electric shock, or something might explode” [R9].

Another shopkeeper added: “It seems to be the strange English temperament of people being a bit

fearful of pushing buttons, and thinking somehow it is going to defraud them or something ridiculous like that” [P4].

A number of shopkeepers took an active role in encouraging curiosity, by ensuring their customers would see the voting device. In one shop [R6], this meant the owner placed the voting device at an angle to increase visibility, in another shop [R7] the owner used her battery operated voting device to regularly approach all customers at the different tables in her cafe.

Furthermore, the local media and social media also played an important role in raising aware- ness of the project, and as a result fostering curiosity about it in the wider Cambridge area.

During the deployment, the project was featured in local radio shows and newspapers. Via Facebook and Twitter, people discussed the results and shared photos of the visualisations. This media activity directly impacted participation. For example, after a front page publi- cation in the city’s newspaper, shopkeepers noticed an increase in people coming into their shops, asking if they could cast their vote. One shopkeeper explained: “It it getting to be

known that this thing is going on. People realise that something is happening, and they are curious about it” [R1].

Towards the end of the study, when the summary visualisation was sprayed onto the railway bridge that connects the two parts of Mill Road, the initial response to this was far less notice- able. From informal conversations with customers, shopkeepers and passers-by, it emerged that many people had heard of the visualisation and the final results through word of mouth — but had not yet seen it themselves. All indicated they would visit it later that day or week, an action that often seemed to require conscious planning. The stark difference in the level of response towards the shop visualisation and bridge summary visualisation suggested people were still resistant to walk to or across the bridge from both ends. While the bridge is one of the few places that is visited by both sides of the street, few people cross it regularly, and as a result few people were found to visit the summary visualisations.