VTechWorks staff will be away for the Thanksgiving holiday beginning at noon on Wednesday, November 27, through Friday, November 29. We will resume normal operations on Monday, December 2. Thank you for your patience.
 

Comparing the Legibility and Comprehension of Type Size, Font Selection and Rendering Technology of Onscreen Type

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorChandler, Scott Bonduranten
dc.contributor.committeecochairHolmes, Glen A.en
dc.contributor.committeecochairDoolittle, Peter E.en
dc.contributor.committeememberHergert, Thomasen
dc.contributor.committeememberPotter, Kenneth R.en
dc.contributor.committeememberSanders, Mark E.en
dc.contributor.departmentTeaching and Learningen
dc.date.accessioned2014-03-14T20:18:40Zen
dc.date.adate2001-11-27en
dc.date.available2014-03-14T20:18:40Zen
dc.date.issued2001-10-08en
dc.date.rdate2007-10-13en
dc.date.sdate2001-11-17en
dc.description.abstractThis experimental study investigated the relationship between the independent measures of font selection, type size, and type rendering technology and the dependent measures of legibility, as measured by the Chapman-Cook speed of reading test, as well as comprehension, as measured by a series of questions from the verbal comprehension section of the Graduate Record Exam. An electronic instrument presented test items in 12 different typographic styles. The study tested 117 college students at a university in southwestern Virginia. Each participant encountered anti-alias type rendering style and the orthochromatic type rendering style while participants were randomly assigned to either Helvetica or Palatino (font selection) and 8, 10 or 12 point type size. Results indicated that the 12 point type size was read more quickly than either 8 point type or 10 point type. There was also an interaction between font selection and type rendering technology for speed of reading: Helvetica without an anti-alias was read more quickly than Helvetica with an anti-alias and more quickly than Palatino without an anti-alias. These findings contradict an earlier, similar study. There were no significant results with regard to comprehension. <i>[Vita removed Oct. 13, 2010. GMc]</i>en
dc.description.degreePh. D.en
dc.identifier.otheretd-11172001-152449en
dc.identifier.sourceurlhttp://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-11172001-152449/en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/29629en
dc.publisherVirginia Techen
dc.relation.haspartchandler-appendix.pdfen
dc.relation.haspartchandler-vita.pdfen
dc.relation.haspartchandler.pdfen
dc.rightsIn Copyrighten
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/en
dc.subjectEducationen
dc.subjectcomprehensionen
dc.subjecttype sizeen
dc.subjectreading speeden
dc.subjecttype rendering technologyen
dc.subjectperceptual encodingen
dc.subjectspeed of readingen
dc.subjectPalatinoen
dc.subjectlegibilityen
dc.subjectsans-serifen
dc.subjectcomputeren
dc.subjectserifen
dc.subjectHelveticaen
dc.subjectorthochromaticen
dc.subjectfont selectionen
dc.subjecteffectivenessen
dc.subjecttypeen
dc.subjectanti-aliasen
dc.subjecttypographyen
dc.titleComparing the Legibility and Comprehension of Type Size, Font Selection and Rendering Technology of Onscreen Typeen
dc.typeDissertationen
thesis.degree.disciplineCurriculum and Instructionen
thesis.degree.grantorVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State Universityen
thesis.degree.leveldoctoralen
thesis.degree.namePh. D.en

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
Thumbnail Image
Name:
chandler.pdf
Size:
606.09 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download
Thumbnail Image
Name:
chandler-appendix.pdf
Size:
2.07 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download
Thumbnail Image
Name:
chandler-vita.pdf
Size:
408.95 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download

Collections

Doctoral Dissertations