The Cost of Cool: Typographic Style Legibility in Reading at a Glance

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.

[1]  Jonathan Dobres,et al.  Utilising psychophysical techniques to investigate the effects of age, typeface design, size and display polarity on glance legibility , 2016, Ergonomics.

[2]  Jonathan Dobres,et al.  The effects of Chinese typeface design, stroke weight, and contrast polarity on glance based legibility , 2016, Displays.

[3]  M. Leek Adaptive procedures in psychophysical research , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[4]  Paul J Carlson,et al.  EVALUATION OF THE CLEARVIEW FONT FOR NEGATIVE CONTRAST TRAFFIC SIGNS , 2006 .

[5]  Jonathan Dobres,et al.  Empirical Assessment of the Legibility of the Highway Gothic and Clearview Signage Fonts , 2017 .

[6]  G. Legge,et al.  Psychophysics of reading—I. Normal vision , 1985, Vision Research.

[7]  Jonathan Dobres,et al.  Assessing the impact of typeface design in a text-rich automotive user interface , 2014, Ergonomics.

[8]  Paul J Carlson,et al.  NIGHTTIME LEGIBILITY OF GROUND-MOUNTED TRAFFIC SIGNS AS A FUNCTION OF FONT, COLOR, AND RETROREFLECTIVE SHEETING TYPE , 2002 .

[9]  R. Schvaneveldt,et al.  Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. , 1971, Journal of experimental psychology.

[10]  Jonathan Dobres,et al.  Effects of ambient illumination, contrast polarity, and letter size on text legibility under glance-like reading. , 2017, Applied ergonomics.

[11]  William S. Helton,et al.  Climbing With a Head-Mounted Display , 2016, Hum. Factors.

[12]  Ben D. Sawyer,et al.  Google Glass , 2014, Hum. Factors.

[13]  Keith Rayner,et al.  The influence of text legibility on eye movements during reading , 2010 .

[14]  Bruce Mehler,et al.  An Evaluation of Typeface Design in a Text-Rich Automotive User Interface , 2012 .

[15]  H. Levitt Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. , 1971, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  P A Hancock,et al.  The effects of display size on performance , 2015, Ergonomics.

[17]  H. BOUMA,et al.  Interaction Effects in Parafoveal Letter Recognition , 1970, Nature.

[18]  Barbara S. Chaparro,et al.  Comparing the effects of text size and format on the readibility of computer-displayed Times New Roman and Arial text , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[19]  Leah L Thompson,et al.  Impact of social and technological distraction on pedestrian crossing behaviour: an observational study , 2012, Injury Prevention.

[20]  Jonathan Dobres,et al.  A Pilot Study Measuring the Relative Legibility of Five Simplified Chinese Typefaces Using Psychophysical Methods , 2014, AutomotiveUI.

[21]  Bryan Reimer,et al.  Additional Findings on the Multi-Modal Demands of “Voice-Command” Interfaces , 2016 .

[22]  Tracey D. Berger,et al.  Crowding and eccentricity determine reading rate. , 2007, Journal of vision.