Bibliography
Arditi, A., & Cho, J. (2005). Serifs and font legibility. Vision Research 45(23), 2926-2933.
This study looked at whether, if all other font features are held constant, the presence of serifs enhances or detracts from font legibility. Arditi and Cho are vision researchers who created their own fonts with varying serif sizes (0 percent, 5 percent, and 10 percent cap height). They found that while five percent serif fonts may be slightly more legible than sans-serif, the change may be due to an increase in inter-letter spacing and not serifs themselves. They concluded that their data did not show any significant increase in legibility with serif fonts.
Beldie IP, Pastoor S, & Schwartz E. (1983) Fixed Versus Variable Letter Width for Televised Text. Human Factors 25(3), 273-277.
In this study, participants read aloud, identified errors, and located particular lines in fixed width and variable width text on computer screens. The study found that variable width font is easier to read. Variable width font refers to fonts where the width of each letter depends on which letter it is. In contrast, fixed width fonts always have the same letter width regardless of the letter in question.
Bernard, M.,& Mills, M. (2000). So, What Size and Type of Font Should I Use on My Website? Software Usability Research Laboratory (SURL) Usability News. Retrieved November 12, 2005, from http://psychology.wichita.edu/surl/usabilitynews/2S/font.htm
In this study, the researchers looked at the readability of Times New Roman, a serif font, and Arial, a sans-serif font. Both Times New Roman and Arial are print fonts. Thirty-five participants were asked to read a passage as quickly and accurately as possible. Times New Roman was the fastest font to read and was seen as the second most legible font. Arial was the most preferred font.
Bernard, M., Liao, C. H., & Mills, M. (2001). The effects of font type and size on the legibility and reading time of online text by older adults. In CHI '01 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Seattle, Washington, March 31 - April 05, 2001). CHI '01. ACM Press, New York, NY, 175-176.
Bernard, Liao, and Mills investigated whether older adults are better able to read 12pt or 14pt font. The researchers also compared the readability of serif and sans-serif fonts. After having the study participants read web and print fonts quickly from set distances, they concluded that there was no difference in the readability of the web and print fonts.
Bernard, M., Chaparro, B., Mills, M., & Halcomb, C. (2002). Examining children's reading performance and preference for different computer-displayed text. Behavior and Information Technology. 21(2), 87-96.
The goal of the study was to see how different font sizes effect actual and perceived readability for elementary-age children. Readability was tested by having children ages 9 to 11 read eight different passages at the fourth grade reading level. The children showed a preference for larger fonts. In their paper, Bernard and his research team make an interesting connection between font size and x-height. They point out that children may be showing a preference for increased x-height. Larger x-height is correlated with increased font size.
Bernard, M., Chaparro, B., Mills, M. & Halcomb, C. (2003). Comparing the effects of text size and format on the readability of computer-displayed Times New Roman and Arial text. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 59(6), 823-835.
In this study, the researchers compared the readability and legibility of Times New Roman (serif) and Arial (sans-serif) fonts by studying readability with relation to typeface, size, and format. The researchers concluded that the most important factor in determining font preference was not serif or sans-serif but instead font size. The research subjects preferred the larger, 12 point, font. In addition, although the subjects indicated that they preferred Arial, there was no difference in terms of readability between Arial and Times New Roman.
Boyarski, D., Neuwirth, C., Forlizzi, J., and Regli, S. H. (1998). A study of fonts designed for screen display. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Los Angeles, California, United States, April 18 - 23, 1998). C. Karat, A. Lund, J. Coutaz, and J. Karat, Eds. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., New York, NY, 87-94.
The study looked at whether, irregardless of serif or sans-serif, we should use fonts designed for the screen or print. The researchers used the Nelson-Denny test as a means of scoring reading effectiveness. The authors also investigated reading differences between bitmap and anti-aliased fonts. In addition, the researchers found that there is no perceptible difference in the readability of Georgia and Times New Roman fonts.
Dyson, M., & Haselgrove, M. (2001). The influence of reading speed and line length on the effectiveness of reading from screen. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 54(4), 585-612.
This paper describes a study in which the influence of line length and font type was measured for a visual search task and for information retrieval. The authors found that while line length makes a significant difference for reading, font type plays a smaller, more subjective role.
Kolers, P. A., Duchnicky, R. L., and Ferguson, D.C. (1981). Eye movement measurement of readability of CRT displays. Human Factors. 23, 517-527.
Although this article describes a study involving page scrolling, it is often cited as evidence that increasing line spacing decreases reading time. This finding is attributed to the fact that close spacing of text requires more "eye fixations per line" and, as a result, less words are read during each eye fixation.
Ling, J. & van Schaik, P. The influence of font type and line length on visual search and information retrieval in web pages. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 11 October 2005.
In this recent article, Ling and van Schaik investigate how the way text is presented on a page affects usability. The researchers conducted two studies to test the role of font type and line length in information retrieval. In the first experiment, the subjects had a visual search task and in the second an information retrieval task. The researchers concluded that while font was irrelevant for both experiments, longer line lengths led to both better scanning and subjective outcomes.
Mills, M., & Weldon, L. (1987). Reading text from computer screens. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR). 19(4), 329-357.
In the literature review part of their article, Mills and Weldon do a great job summarizing the major research techniques for measuring readability and legibility. In specific, they point out that while readability research focuses on word, sentence, and paragraph meaning, legibility looks at how letters are distinguished. For instance, they state that a lot of legibility researchers have subjects try to read letters and words as they become increasingly fuzzy (non-distinct).
Muter P, Latremouille S.A., & Treuniet W.C. (1982). Extended Reading of Continuous Text on Television Screens. Human Factors 24(5), 501-508.
In contrast to the Beldie study, Muter found that there is no perceptible difference in the readability of variable and fixed letter width text. In the study, thirty-two subjects read text for 2 hours. Half of the subjects read from a book while the other half read from a television screen. The researchers found that the subjects reading from a television read 28.5 percent slower than the subjects reading from a book.
Nahm, E.S., Preece, J., Resnick, B., & Mills, M.E. (2004). Usability of health websites for older adults: A preliminary study. CIN: Computers, Informatics. 22, 326-334.
This artice discusses an expert evaluation and usability test with senior Web users which found that older adults are very sensitive to font size on a page. The senior adults were changed with performing tasks such as finding specific information on a page.
Poole, A. (2005). Literature Review: Which Are More Legible: Serif or Sans Serif Typefaces? Retrieved November 1, 2005, from http://www.alexpoole.info/academic/index.html
An amazing resource, Poole sheds light on the history of the serif vs. sans-serif typography debate and analyzes whether there is a conclusive evidence that serif or sans-serif is more legible or readable. In particular, he offers very concise definitions of readability and legibility, arguing that while readability refers to the best arrangement of letters, legibility relates to the ability to recognize particular letters or words.
Shamir A, & Rappoport A. (1997). Quality enhancements of digital outline fonts. Computers & Graphics. 21(6), 713-725.
Although this article compares Postscript and True Type as outline representation for characters in fonts, it also provides several useful definitions related to fonts and typefaces. Postscript is a standards graphic artist font and a PostScript font includes POSTSCRIPT instructions dictating the shape of each letter. True Type is a digital font that is now used by both Apple and Microsoft operating systems that was designed by Apple Computer.
van der Geest T, & Loorbach N. (2005). Testing the visual consistency of web sites Technical Communication 52(1), 27-36.
The major finding of van der Geest and Loorbach's study that relates to font is that font color indicates visual consistency to site visitors. The researchers used a card-sorting test and had subjects who were not color blind distinguish the color consistency and inconsistency of web pages and page elements. The study was designed to test whether users, instead of experts, could detect visual inconsistency on a page. The conclusion was that non-expert users can tell if a page is visually consistent.
Zibell, K. (2000). 'Klare's Useful Information' for Web designers. ACM Journal Computer Documentation. 24(3), 141-147.
Although this is not a research paper, Zibell presents a number of guidelines for creating good web pages. One of these pieces of advice is to create pages that do not have a lot of dense text. In other words, it is bad practice to have text spaced too closely together.