atw: Re: Psychophysics of reading, revisited

But the abstract makes no mention of comprehension or retention - which were
the focus of Wheildon's study (condemned by James in an earlier post as
"slight"). Without measurement of these critical factors, reading speed is
no better an indication of effectiveness than Schriver's focus on reader
preference.

Michael Lewis
Lecturer and convenor of postgraduate programs in editing and publishing
Department of Linguistics
Macquarie University


On 11 April 2011 22:06, James Hunt <jameshunt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>
> On 11 Apr 2011, at 7:56 PM, Geoffrey Marnell wrote:
>
>  Before I plough through Tinker's papers, do you know off-hand whether
> Tinker did research of font choice and comprehension? In particular, sans
> serif versus serif.
>
>
> Apparently he did. This abstract is in PsycNET  (http://psycnet.apa.org).
>
> Studies of typographical factors influencing speed of reading. X. Style of
> type face. By Paterson, D. G.; Tinker, M. A.
> Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 16(6), Dec 1932, 605-613.
>
> "Ten type faces were compared with respect to their effect on reading rate.
> Ten groups of 90 college students were tested—a total of 900 subjects. No
> important differences in rate of reading text material were found when the
> following type faces were used: Scotch Roman; Garamont; Antique; Bodoni; Old
> Style; Caslon O. S.; Kabel lite; and Cheltenham. Text printed with American
> Typewriter type was read 5.1% more slowly than text printed with Scotch
> Roman type. Cloister Black type (Old English) retards speed of reading
> 16.5%. Type faces in common use are equally legible."
>
> Kabel Light is a sans serif typeface; Cloister Black is an elaborate Old
> English typeface; American Typewriter is a monospaced serif font; and the
> rest are conventional serif fonts.
>
> JH
>
>

Other related posts: