The Optimum Font Size and Type for Students Aged 9-12 Reading Arabic Characters on Screen: A Case Study

More and more, interest in the way data is displayed on screen has increased, especially with the increase in the number of people using e-text for learning purposes. So, this requires more focus on factors that affect screen legibility. Text display factors, such as font size, line length and font type, have an impact on reading online. Two font types [Arabic Traditional and Simplified Arabic] in four different sizes [10, 14, 16 and 18] are measured using Arabic text. On-line processes were measured using reading–aloud technique. Accuracy of reading was also measured by the average of errors that students made when reading the text, while reading speed was tested by the time it took students to read the text. However, results indicated that Arabic text in font size 10 is not readable to students aged 10 to 12. On the other hand, font sizes sixteen and eighteen are more readable than any smaller-sized font, the averages of error size 18 improve in all font types, while age has a significant impact on reading speed. Simplified Arabic font is reported as readable to students aged 10-12, especially in sizes 14 and 18.

[1]  Gary S. Rubin,et al.  Investigation into font characteristics for optimum reading fluency in readers with sight problems , 2005 .

[2]  Salim Abu-Rabia,et al.  The role of vowels and context in the reading of highly skilled native Arabic readers , 1996 .

[3]  James E. Sheedy,et al.  Text Legibility and the Letter Superiority Effect , 2005, Hum. Factors.

[4]  Chien-Hsiung Chen,et al.  Effect of Dynamic Display and Speed of Display Movement on Reading Chinese Text Presented on a Small Screen , 2005, Perceptual and motor skills.

[5]  Thomas S. Tullis,et al.  Readability of fonts in the windows environment , 1995, CHI 95 Conference Companion.

[6]  Jodi Forlizzi,et al.  A study of fonts designed for screen display , 1998, CHI.

[7]  P A Kolers,et al.  Eye Movement Measurement of Readability of CRT Displays , 1981, Human factors.

[8]  S. Shirali-Shahreza,et al.  Persian/Arabic Text Font Estimation using Dots , 2006, 2006 IEEE International Symposium on Signal Processing and Information Technology.

[9]  Mary C. Dyson,et al.  Reading in examination-type situations: the effects of text layout on performance , 2006 .

[10]  Alan Clarke,et al.  Designing Computer-Based Learning Materials , 2001 .

[11]  Jo-Anne LeFevre,et al.  Cognitive load in hypertext reading: A review , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[12]  Cbema Computer,et al.  Guide to the draft American national standard for human factors engineering of visual display terminal workstations , 1985 .

[13]  Wanda J. Smith.  Iso and ANSI Ergonomic Standards for Computer Products: A Guide to Implementation and Compliance , 1996 .

[14]  Salim Abu-Rabia,et al.  The Effect of Arabic Vowels on the Reading Comprehension of Second- and Sixth-Grade Native Arab Children , 1999, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[15]  Adnan Amin,et al.  Recognition of printed arabic text based on global features and decision tree learning techniques , 2000, Pattern Recognit..

[16]  Doig Simmonds,et al.  Data Presentation and Visual Literacy in Medicine and Science , 1994 .

[17]  G E Legge,et al.  Psychophysics of reading. XV: Font effects in normal and low vision. , 1996, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[18]  The effect of font size and type on reading performance with Arabic words in normally sighted and simulated cataract subjects , 2007, Clinical & experimental optometry.

[19]  Aries Arditi,et al.  Serifs and font legibility , 2005, Vision Research.

[20]  Paul van Schaik,et al.  The influence of font type and line length on visual search and information retrieval in web pages , 2006, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[21]  L Reynolds.  LEGIBILITY STUDIES: THEIR RELEVENCE TO PRESENT-DAY DOCUMENTATION METHODS , 1979 .

[22]  Gene Lynch,et al.  American National Standard for Human Factors Engineering of Visual Display Terminal Workstations: A Report to the Society , 1985 .

[23]  Michael Bernard,et al.  A Comparison of Popular Online Fonts: Which Size and Type is Best? , 2002 .

[24]  Alfred Bork,et al.  Designing Computer-Based Learning Materials , 1986, NATO ASI Series.