Activities with smart devices have been more complicated and diversified, and font legibility influences these activities both directly and indirectly. This study investigated the difference of Korean font legibility between printed paper and VDT. Four Korean fonts, Dodum and Gulim - sans serif types, and Batang and Gungseo - serif types, were compared in experiments. The result showed that there was a significant difference in the font legibility for printed paper, but not for VDT. On printed paper, serif types were more legible than sans serif types. However, a significant difference between serif types and sans serif types were not found in VDT. Dodum, one of the sans serif font types achieved the highest score on preference in the survey questionnaire among the four Korean fonts. The paper suggests that serif types did not always provide the optimal legibility in VDT.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Al-HarkanI. M.RamadanM. Z. (2005). Effects of pixel shape and color, and matrix pixel density of Arabic digital typeface on characters’ legibility. International journal of industrial ergonomics, 35(7), 652-664.
2.
ArditiA.KnoblauchK.GrunwaldI. (1990). Reading with fixed and variable character pitch. JOSA A, 7(10), 2011-2015.
3.
ArditiA. (1996). Typography, print legibility, and low vision. Remediation and management of low vision, 1, 237-248.
4.
ArditiA. (2004). Adjustable typography: an approach to enhancing low vision text accessibility. Ergonomics, 47(5), 469-482.
5.
ArditiA.ChoJ. (2005). Serifs and font legibility. Vision research, 45(23), 2926-2933.
6.
BaldwinT. S.BaileyL. J. (1971). Readability of technical training materials presented on microfiche versus offset copy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 55(1), 37.
7.
BergerC. (1950). Experiments on the legibility of symbols of different width and height. Acta ophthalmologica, 28(3), 423-434.
8.
BernardM. L.ChaparroB. S.MillsM. M.HalcombC. G. (2003). Comparing the effects of text size and format on the readibility of computer-displayed Times New Roman and Arial text. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 59(6), 823-835.
9.
FoxJ. G. (1963). A Comparison of Gothic Elite and Standard Elite Type Faces. Ergonomics, 6(2), 193-198.
10.
HuangD. L.RauP. L. P.LiuY. (2009). Effects of font size, display resolution and task type on reading Chinese fonts from mobile devices. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 39(1), 81-89.
11.
HwangW. S.LeeD. C.LeeS. D. (1997). An experimental study on search speed and error rate according to Korean letter size and font on search task with VDT. Journal of the Ergonomics Society of Korea, 16(2), 29-38.
12.
JungH.ChoK. J.HanK. H. (2006). The impact of brightness, polarity and hue difference on legibility and emotional effect of word in visual display. Journal of the Korean Society for Cognitive Science, 17(5), 337-356.
13.
LeeD. S.ShiehK. K.JengS. C.ShenI. H. (2008). Effect of character size and lighting on legibility of electronic papers. Displays, 29(1), 10-17.
14.
LeeS. J.KimJ. W. (2007). An experimental study on the impacts of luminance contrast upon readability in VDT environments. Journal of the Ergonomics Society of Korea, 26(2), 21-33.
15.
MackebenM. (2000). Typefaces Influence Peripheral Letter Recognition and Can be Optimized for Reading with Eccentric Viewing. Vision Rehabilitation, 293.
16.
McLeanR. (1980). The Thames and Hudson manual of typography. London, UK: Thames and Hudson.
17.
PatersonD. G.TinkerM. A. (1932). Studies of typographical factors influencing speed of reading. X. Style of type face. Journal of Applied Psychology, 16(6), 605.
18.
RoethleinB. E. (1912). The relative legibility of different faces of printing types. The American Journal of Psychology, 1-36.
19.
RubinsteinR. (1988). Digital typography: an introduction to type and composition for computer system design (pp. I-XI). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
20.
SandersM. S.McCormickE. J. (1998). Human factors in engineering and design (Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 153-153). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
21.
ShiehK. K.ChenM. T.ChuangJ. H. (1997). Effects of color combination and typography on identification of characters briefly presented on VDTs. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 9(2), 169-181.
22.
ShurtleffD. A. (1974). Legibility research. In Proc. SID (Vol.15, No. 2, pp. 41-51).
23.
SohnB. L. (2011). The effects of differentiation strategy on consumers’ purchase intention in korea smart phone market. Pai Chai University.
24.
TaylorC. D. (1934). The relative legibility of black and white print. Journal of Educational Psychology, 25(8), 561.
25.
TinkerM. A. (1963). Influence of simultaneous variation in size of type, width of line, and leading for newspaper type. Journal of Applied Psychology, 47(6), 380.
26.
TullisT. S.BoyntonJ. L.HershH. (1995). Readability of fonts in the windows environment. In Conference companion on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 127-128). ACM.
27.
YagerD.AquilanteK.PlassR. (1998). High and low luminance letters, acuity reserve, and font effects on reading speed. Vision Research, 38(17), 2527-2531.
