David's post leads to some interesting questions:
1. To what extent (if at all) does a reader's "preference" reflect
"effectiveness", or comprehension?
2. It seems at least possible that fonts preferences vary according to
the purpose of reading - information or entertainment. Has this been
assessed?
3. To what extent is our ability to read, interpret, and understand a
typeface shaped by the texts we were exposed to in childhood, when we
were learning to read?
Key (old-ish) texts here are Karen Shriver's _Dynamics in Document
Design_, where she reports only on reader preference (aesthetics rather
than comprehension), and Colin Wheildon's _Type and Layout_, where he
does assess comprehension and recall, though his methodology is flawed
in some respects.
- Michael Lewis
On 2017-01-27 09:09, David Creamer wrote:
My two cents...
As far as readability, I read something a _long_ time ago that said in the
United States, the reading preference (on hard copy) was split about
50/50--while in other countries, serif fonts still had the edge (about
80/20). That was due to the internet being more popular in the US at the
time, so the other countries might be closer to the US percentage now. Of
course, it is possible that the san serif preference could have surpassed
the serif with younger readers too.
_______________________________________________
This message is from the Framers mailing list
Send messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com
Visit the list's homepage at http://www.frameusers.com
Archives located at http://www.mail-archive.com/framers%40lists.frameusers.com/
Subscribe and unsubscribe at
http://lists.frameusers.com/listinfo.cgi/framers-frameusers.com
Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com
