No abstract

Psychophysical research on text legibility has historically investigated factors such as size, colour and contrast, but there has been relatively little direct empirical evaluation of typographic design itself, particularly in the emerging context of glance reading. In the present study, participants performed a lexical decision task controlled by an adaptive staircase method. Two typefaces, a ‘humanist’ and ‘square grotesque’ style, were tested. Study I examined positive and negative polarities, while Study II examined two text sizes. Stimulus duration thresholds were sensitive to differences between typefaces, polarities and sizes. Typeface also interacted significantly with age, particularly for conditions with higher legibility thresholds. These results are consistent with previous research assessing the impact of the same typefaces on interface demand in a simulated driving environment. This simplified methodology of assessing legibility differences can be adapted to investigate a wide array of questions relevant to typographic and interface designs. Practitioner Summary: A method is described for rapidly investigating relative legibility of different typographical features. Results indicate that during glance-like reading induced by the psychophysical technique and under the lighting conditions considered, humanist-style type is significantly more legible than a square grotesque style, and that black-on-white text is significantly more legible than white-on-black.

Text-rich driver–vehicle interfaces are increasingly common in new vehicles, yet the effects of different typeface characteristics on task performance in this brief off-road based glance context remains sparsely examined. Subjects completed menu selection tasks while in a driving simulator. Menu text was set either in a ‘humanist’ or ‘square grotesque’ typeface. Among men, use of the humanist typeface resulted in a 10.6% reduction in total glance time as compared to the square grotesque typeface. Total response time and number of glances showed similar reductions. The impact of typeface was either more modest or not apparent for women. Error rates for both males and females were 3.1% lower for the humanist typeface. This research suggests that optimised typefaces may mitigate some interface demands. Future work will need to assess whether other typeface characteristics can be optimised to further reduce demand, improve legibility, increase usability and help meet new governmental distraction guidelines. Practitioner Summary: Text-rich in-vehicle interfaces are increasingly common, but the effects of typeface on task performance remain sparsely studied. We show that among male drivers, menu selection tasks are completed with 10.6% less visual glance time when text is displayed in a ‘humanist’ typeface, as compared to a ‘square grotesque’.

No abstract

When designers typographically tweak fonts to make an interface look ‘cool,’ they do so amid a rich design tradition, albeit one that is little-studied in regards to the rapid ‘at a glance’ reading afforded by many modern electronic displays. Such glanceable reading is routinely performed during human-machine interactions where accessing text competes with attention to crucial operational environments. There, adverse events of significant consequence can materialize in milliseconds. As such, the present study set out to test the lower threshold of time needed to read and process text modified with three common typographic manipulations: letter height, width, and case. Results showed significant penalties for the smaller size. Lowercase and condensed width text also decreased performance, especially when presented at a smaller size. These results have important implications for the types of design decisions commonly faced by interface professionals, and underscore the importance of typographic research into the human performance impact of seemingly “aesthetic” design decisions. The cost of “cool” design may be quite steep in high-risk contexts.