make it big! the effect of font size and line spacing on online readability
Post on 25-Jan-2017
4.437 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
MAKE IT BIGThe Effect of Font Size and Line Spacing on Online Readability.
Luz Rello Martin Pielot Mari-Carmen Marcos
CHI 2016: ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsSan Jose McEnery Convention Center, May 7 – 12 at San Jose, CA, USA
Presenter: Martin Pielot, @martinpielot
Online Reading is a daily habit for many
WHICH FONT SIZE FOR BEST READABILITY?
readability refers to the ease with which a reader can read and understand a written text. It only refers to the properties of the presentation of the text, not the content of the text itself
16 pixels 12 points
PIXELS AND POINTS• Points (pts)
– resolution-independent unit – 72 pts = 1 inch = 2.54 cm
• Pixels (px)– used to be resolution dependent– nowadays ¾ of 1 point
16 px = 12pt (*)
* https://developers.google.com/speed/docs/insights/UseLegibleFontSizes
PREVIOUS SCIENTIFIC STUDIES
Authors Year Method Tested Sizes Best Size
Bernard et al. 2001, 2002, 2003
read-aloud 10-14 pts 14
Banerjee et al. 2011 read-aloud 10-14 pts 14
Bhatia et al. 2011 preference 10-14 pts -
Beymer & Russel 2005, 2007, 2008
eye-tracker 10-14 pts 14
• Confusing, conflicting, and evidence-lacking advice in forums
• Scientific research found „bigger is better“ but we did not find any test with fonts larger than 14 points.
IN THIS PAPER
• control group (n=104) of study to determine optimal font size for people with dyslexia
• much larger font sizes (up to 26 points)
results challenge existing insights and recommendations
methodology
STUDY SETUP
• screen : 17 inch TFT, 1024x768
• eye tracker : tobii 1750• website : wikipedia
(animals)• browser : firefox• font : arial
INDEPENDENT MEASURES
• font size (pt) : 10, 12, 14, 18, 22, 26
within-subject factor
• line spacing : 0.8, 1.0, 1.4, 1.8
between-group factor
Dependent Measures
MEAN FIXATION DURATIONas objective measure for readability
COMPREHENSION QUESTIONSto avoid that participants just „skim“ the text
SUBJECTIVE READABILITY & COMPREHENSIONto identify mismatch between perceived and objective performance
reading
PARTICIPANTS
• 104 volunteers (61 female, 43 male)• 92 studying or had finished university
• aged 14* – 54 (M = 30.24, SD = 9.13)• normal or corrected-to-normal vision
* Minors were accompanied by parents
results
Font Size
sig. effect of font sizeF(5,445) = 66.825,p < .001
large effect size(η2 = 0.159)
pairwise comparison• 10pt > than all larger• 12pt > than all larger• 14pt > than all larger• 18pt > than 22pt
MEAN FIXATION DURATION
objective readability best for 18/22/26 pts
sig. effect of font sizeF(5,445) = 5.2489, p < .001
small effect size(η2 = 0.025)
pairwise comparison• 10pt <12pt
MEAN NUMBER OF FIXATIONS
limited effect on number of fixations
sig. effect of font sizeχ2 (5) = 135.85, p < .001
pairwise comparison• 10pt < than all larger• 12pt < than all larger• 14pt < than 18pt• 26pt < than 18pt
SUBJECTIVE READABILITY
best subjective readability for 18 pt font size
sig. effect of font sizeχ2 (5) = 27.29, p < .001
sig. less correct answers for• 10 & 12 compared to 18 pt• 12 pt compared to 26 pt
COMPREHENSION SCORES
small fonts may impair comprehension
sig. effect of font sizeF (5, 363) = 18.614, p < .001
pairwise comparison• 10pt < 14pt +• 12pt < 14pt +
SUBJECTIVE COMPREHENSION
subjective comprehension impaired for 10 & 12 pt
Line Spacing
no sig. effect of line spacingF (3, 89) = 0.064, p = .978
MEAN FIXATION DURATION
no evidence re: line spacing
no sig. effect of font sizeF (3, 365) = 2.074, p = .103
SUBJECTIVE READABILITY
no evidence re: line spacing
sig. interaction effect betweenfont size x line spacingF (15, 445) = 4.098, p < .001)
small effect size(η2 = 0.034)
no interact. effect for 10-18 ptmarginal effect for 10-22 pt
MEAN FIXATION DURATION
larger fonts are affected by line spacing
sig. effect of line spacingχ2 (3) = 19.56, p < .001
sig. less correct answers for• 0.8 compared to all other
line spacings
COMPREHENSION SCORES
small line spacings may impair comprehension
sig. effect of line spacingF (3, 365) = 3.249, p = .022
pairwise comparison• 1.0 > 1.8
SUBJECTIVE COMPREHENSION
subj. comprehension impaired for largest spacing
conclusions
USE 18 POINT FONT SIZE• 18 pts and larger had best objective readability• subjective readability was highest for 18 pts
USE 1.0 or 1.4 LINE SPACING• comprehension scores were lower for 0.8• subjective comprehension was affected for 1.8
AVOID 10 AND 12 POINT FONT SIZE• comprehension scores were lowest• readability (subj + obj) was worst
STARK CONTRAST TO COMMON RECOMMENDATIONS
Set Chrome or Firefox to 24 (pixels) to have 18 points font size
MAKE IT BIGThe Effect of Font Size and Line Spacing on Online Readability.
CHI 2016: ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsSan Jose McEnery Convention Center, May 7 – 12 at San Jose, CA, USA
18 POINT FONT SIZE (24 px) default OR slightly larger LINE SPACING10 AND 12 PTS IMPAIRED UNDERSTANDING
Presenter: Martin Pielot, @martinpielot
Luz Rello Martin Pielot Mari-Carmen Marcos
top related