The effect of font and line width on reading speed in people with mild to moderate vision loss

Rubin, Gary S.; Feely, Mary; Perera, S.; Ekstrom, Katherin; Williamson, Elizabeth

doi:10.1111/j.1475-1313.2006.00409.x

Cited by 40 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Helvetica has been chosen based upon the fact that it is not only the most common non‐serifed font, but also, similar to Arial, it has a larger lower case x‐height than other fonts, and thus upper and lower case letters are more similar in size . Angular letter sizes were calibrated using a microscope and calculated based upon x‐height, (e.g. the height of the lower case letter x).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 61%

“…Both reading speed and reading acuity versions used the non‐serifed bold Helvetica font with a stroke width 1.5× that of regular Helvetica, and as shown by Bernard et al ., increasing stroke width by <2× has little effect on reading speed. Helvetica has been chosen based upon the fact that it is not only the most common non‐serifed font, but also, similar to Arial, it has a larger lower case x‐height than other fonts, and thus upper and lower case letters are more similar in size . Angular letter sizes were calibrated using a microscope and calculated based upon x‐height, (e.g.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This angular size is consistent with the smallest fonts used in the majority of American newspaper text and the mean font size of text messages on smart phones . We displayed each individual sentence in a single line because the optimum length for maximal reading efficiency is about 10 words per line, and published guidelines frequently specify an optimal line width of 60–70 characters . Because reading acuity charts generally employ a multi‐line sentence format, we also compared single line reading speed with three line reading speed.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…two lines vs three lines or four lines, left justify vs R/L justify). Also, font typeface and letter spacing, font boldness are all essential features of reading tests, but seem only to play a minor role in determining reading speed and acuity. Significantly, font size can be a critical determinant of reading speed as letters approach the acuity limit …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

IURead: a new computer‐based reading test

Bradley

2015

Ophthalmic Physiologic Optic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 61%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

IURead: a new computer‐based reading test

Bradley

2015

Ophthalmic Physiologic Optic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hubo un efecto favorable sobre la rapidez de lectura al aumentar el tamaño de letra de 10 a 16 puntos, pero fue mínimo: 11%. Si se usaran letras de 16 puntos para las personas de más de 65 años de edad con visión disminuida, se aumentaría del 88 al 94% la proporción de esa población capaz de leer fluidamente (Rubin et al 2006). …”

unclassified

Efecto de la tipografía y presentación de párrafos de textos impresos sobre el aprendizaje a distancia en personas adultas

Mónge-Nájera¹,

Méndez-Estrada²,

Rodríguez³

2009

URJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

El esfuerzo que se dio luego de la Segunda Guerra Mundial por alfabetizar a la población mundial, estuvo acompañado de estudios sobre cómo se aprende a leer y cómo se puede aprovechar la fisiología de la lectura para optimizar el aprendizaje a partir de libros de texto. Tras llegarse a una serie de conclusiones sobre la relación entre características tipográficas (i.e. tipos de letra y su distribución en el papel) y legibilidad, como que lectores inexpertos se benefician de letras grandes y que el efecto de espaciamiento de letras y ancho de párrafos es mínimo (Richaudeau 1981), el interés en el tema disminuyó.Sin embargo, el estudio de la fisiología de la lectura revivió a fines del siglo XX con la generalización del uso de computadoras, lo que llevó a estudiar los efectos de las características tipográficas sobre la lectura usando pantallas electrónicas en lugar de tinta sobre papel (Wang et al. 2007).Experimentos con lectores de diversas edades usando tamaños de letra de 2 a 16 puntos presentados en pantallas, halló poca mejora en la legibilidad si se aumentaba el tamaño de letra más allá de los 6 puntos, aunque si se le preguntaba a las personas cuáles letras les resultaban más cómodas para leer, respondieron principalmente que eran las de 8 a 12 puntos (Darroch et al. 2005). En experimentos con lectura en pantalla, pruebas con tamaños de letra desde 10 hasta 13 puntos hallaron que en tamaños superiores a 7,8 puntos no hay mejora en la rapidez de lectura (Wang et al. 2007).En el caso de personas con capacidad visual disminuida también existe alguna información sobre el efecto de la tipografía en la lectura. Por ejemplo, un experimento con letras de varios tamaños (10-16 puntos) y tipos (Foundry Form Sans; Helvética, Tiresias y Times New Roman), así ABSTRACT Effect of the typography and paragraph presentation of printed textbooks, on distance learning in adults. The effect of graphic presentation of texts on legibility has been studied, but its effect on learning is virtually unknown. We applied a control text and two treatments (variations in paragraphs and typography) to 169 students (67% women) selected through a random process from a population of 2692 students from a freshmen's course at the State Distance University in San José, Costa Rica, in 2008. The information in the texts was new to the students. After 15 days allowed to study the texts, the students presented a written exam and completed an illustrated survey about paragraph and font characteristics that they preferred when studying. Neither the font nor the presentation of the paragraphs, or the sex of the students, had an effect on exam grade. The survey indicated that there is a subjective preference for 12-point Arial font, normal spacing between letters, single spacing between lines, page numbers located on page side, white background for text, titles in bold, and inclusion of subtitles, summary, highlighted key ideas, important words highlighted in bold, space to hand-write notes, and images printed in color. The font and paragraph presenta...

show abstract

Font effects on reading parameters: comparing Radner Reading Charts printed in Helvetica and Times Roman

Radner

Daxer

et al. 2022

Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To investigate the effect of font choice on reading parameters by using the RADNER Reading Charts printed in two fonts (Helvetica vs. Times Roman) equalized in terms of x-height. Methods This is a cross-sectional study of 40 participants with healthy eyes (18 to 60 years of age; mean: 42.13 ± 12.28 years). Reading performance was evaluated binocularly with RADNER Reading Charts printed in either Helvetica Neue (T1) Roman sans serif (Adobe) or Times New Roman PS Roman serif (Adobe). The test distance was 40 cm. Reading charts were presented in random order. Reading acuity (RA), mean reading speed of all sentences read (MEAN-ALL RS), mean reading speed from 0.8 logRAD to 0.3 logRAD (MEAN-RS), maximum reading speed (MAX-RS), and critical print size (CPS) were compared. Results The RA values obtained for the Helvetica and Times Roman fonts (in full logarithmic units of 0.1 logRAD) did not differ between the two fonts (mean for both fonts: − 0.128 ± 0.064 logRAD; 95% CI for both: − 0.148; − 0.107 logRAD). The differences in all other reading parameters between the two fonts were small and not statistically significant. The analyses revealed narrow confidence intervals and good coefficients of reliability. Except for the CPS (r = 0.49) and RA (equal for Helvetica and Times Roman), the correlations for all parameters were high, ranging from r = 0.92 to r = 0.98. Conclusion The equivalent reading performance obtained with Helvetica and Times Roman (when equalized in x-height and layout) makes these font types interchangeable as standards for reading charts.

show abstract

The effect of font and line width on reading speed in people with mild to moderate vision loss

Cited by 40 publications

References 10 publications

IURead: a new computer‐based reading test

IURead: a new computer‐based reading test

Efecto de la tipografía y presentación de párrafos de textos impresos sobre el aprendizaje a distancia en personas adultas

Font effects on reading parameters: comparing Radner Reading Charts printed in Helvetica and Times Roman

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About