Research

In print, serifs are thought to enhance readability and legibility because they help readers discriminate the ends of letters and make the form of each letter more complex (Arditi, Cho 2005). This is why newspapers and magazines generally use serif lettering. However, with the advent of the web, new questions were raised as to whether serif font was easier to read than sans-serif font. Early evidence suggested that serifs should be avoided online. However, recent studies have shown that using serif fonts online may not be as detrimental to the online reading experience as previously thought. In fact, depending on the purpose for which a serif font is deployed, it might have some advantages over sans-serif font. In addition, recent research has shown that other factors such as x-height, may have clouded serif vs. sans serif thought. X-height often remains standard for serif but not sans-serif fonts.

In a recent study of serif legibility and readability, Arditi and Cho evaluated the use of serifs with respect to reading speed, letter recognition, and continuous reading on paper. The researchers created their own fonts with variable strengths of serifs (Figure 1). They study found that for small letter sizes, serifs may actually interfere with legibility. However, the study also found that the spacing between letters may be more important than serifs when determining legibility. On the whole, the researchers found that there was a neglible difference in the readability and legibility of serif vs. sans-serif fonts. In fact, the authors suggest that letter spacing may be more important than the presence of serifs in increasing legibility and readability (Arditi, Cho, 2005).

serifs

The role of x-height in determining font readability was studied in the context of at what fonts children ages 9 to 11 read best. The researchers found that x-height plays an important role in determining readability (Bernard, 2002). In the study, 12-point Times and Courier had the smallest x-height, while 14 point Arial and Comic had the largest. Arial and Comic were both perceived by the research subjects as being easier to read than Times. In addition, 14 point font was also seen as easier to read than smaller fonts. In the end, the researchers found that one of the perceived advantages of serif fonts, which is that serifs act as letter distinguishers, may be irrelevant on the web. In fact, the serifs may start acting as visual noise. In this study, sans-serif were preferred.

In a different research paper published by Bernard (Bernard, 2003), the researchers compared the readability and legibility of Times New Roman (serif) and Arial (sans-serif) fonts by looking at typeface, size, and format. For format, the researchers compared anti-aliased and dot matrix text. Dot matrix text has a jagged, staircase look on its edges while anti-aliased text adds color contrast, usually gray, between the font and background. The major finding of the study was that people prefer 12 point Arial font. Since Arial has a larger x-height than Times New Roman, it is typically displayed at a smaller size. The participants indicated that Times New Roman felt harder to read than Arial. There was no significant difference in the readability of serif and sans-serif fonts. In terms of dot matrix vs. anti-aliased text, the researchers found that anti-aliased text may be more readable than dot matrix text at larger font sizes.

In a later study, researchers found that whether or not serif makes a difference may be tied to task. For instance, when reading long academic papers, sans-serif may be preferable (Dyson, 2001). In this study, they also found that readers showed a strong preference for Arial, a sans-serif font, over Times, a serif font. Although there was not evidence that Arial led to more effective reading, the researchers advised going with the more popular, comfortable font (Dyson, 2001).

Guidelines