Cargando…

Font effects on reading parameters: comparing Radner Reading Charts printed in Helvetica and Times Roman

PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of font choice on reading parameters by using the RADNER Reading Charts printed in two fonts (Helvetica vs. Times Roman) equalized in terms of x-height. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study of 40 participants with healthy eyes (18 to 60 years of age; mean: 42.1...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Radner, Wolfgang, Radner, Michael, Daxer, Barbara, Benesch, Thomas, Ettl, Armin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9477910/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35471739
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00417-022-05665-y
_version_ 1784790466058780672
author Radner, Wolfgang
Radner, Michael
Daxer, Barbara
Benesch, Thomas
Ettl, Armin
author_facet Radner, Wolfgang
Radner, Michael
Daxer, Barbara
Benesch, Thomas
Ettl, Armin
author_sort Radner, Wolfgang
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of font choice on reading parameters by using the RADNER Reading Charts printed in two fonts (Helvetica vs. Times Roman) equalized in terms of x-height. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study of 40 participants with healthy eyes (18 to 60 years of age; mean: 42.13 ± 12.28 years). Reading performance was evaluated binocularly with RADNER Reading Charts printed in either Helvetica Neue (T1) Roman sans serif (Adobe) or Times New Roman PS Roman serif (Adobe). The test distance was 40 cm. Reading charts were presented in random order. Reading acuity (RA), mean reading speed of all sentences read (MEAN-ALL RS), mean reading speed from 0.8 logRAD to 0.3 logRAD (MEAN-RS), maximum reading speed (MAX-RS), and critical print size (CPS) were compared. RESULTS: The RA values obtained for the Helvetica and Times Roman fonts (in full logarithmic units of 0.1 logRAD) did not differ between the two fonts (mean for both fonts: − 0.128 ± 0.064 logRAD; 95% CI for both: − 0.148; − 0.107 logRAD). The differences in all other reading parameters between the two fonts were small and not statistically significant. The analyses revealed narrow confidence intervals and good coefficients of reliability. Except for the CPS (r = 0.49) and RA (equal for Helvetica and Times Roman), the correlations for all parameters were high, ranging from r = 0.92 to r = 0.98. CONCLUSION: The equivalent reading performance obtained with Helvetica and Times Roman (when equalized in x-height and layout) makes these font types interchangeable as standards for reading charts. [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00417-022-05665-y.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9477910
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94779102022-09-17 Font effects on reading parameters: comparing Radner Reading Charts printed in Helvetica and Times Roman Radner, Wolfgang Radner, Michael Daxer, Barbara Benesch, Thomas Ettl, Armin Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Miscellaneous PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of font choice on reading parameters by using the RADNER Reading Charts printed in two fonts (Helvetica vs. Times Roman) equalized in terms of x-height. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study of 40 participants with healthy eyes (18 to 60 years of age; mean: 42.13 ± 12.28 years). Reading performance was evaluated binocularly with RADNER Reading Charts printed in either Helvetica Neue (T1) Roman sans serif (Adobe) or Times New Roman PS Roman serif (Adobe). The test distance was 40 cm. Reading charts were presented in random order. Reading acuity (RA), mean reading speed of all sentences read (MEAN-ALL RS), mean reading speed from 0.8 logRAD to 0.3 logRAD (MEAN-RS), maximum reading speed (MAX-RS), and critical print size (CPS) were compared. RESULTS: The RA values obtained for the Helvetica and Times Roman fonts (in full logarithmic units of 0.1 logRAD) did not differ between the two fonts (mean for both fonts: − 0.128 ± 0.064 logRAD; 95% CI for both: − 0.148; − 0.107 logRAD). The differences in all other reading parameters between the two fonts were small and not statistically significant. The analyses revealed narrow confidence intervals and good coefficients of reliability. Except for the CPS (r = 0.49) and RA (equal for Helvetica and Times Roman), the correlations for all parameters were high, ranging from r = 0.92 to r = 0.98. CONCLUSION: The equivalent reading performance obtained with Helvetica and Times Roman (when equalized in x-height and layout) makes these font types interchangeable as standards for reading charts. [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00417-022-05665-y. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-04-26 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9477910/ /pubmed/35471739 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00417-022-05665-y Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visithttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Miscellaneous
Radner, Wolfgang
Radner, Michael
Daxer, Barbara
Benesch, Thomas
Ettl, Armin
Font effects on reading parameters: comparing Radner Reading Charts printed in Helvetica and Times Roman
title Font effects on reading parameters: comparing Radner Reading Charts printed in Helvetica and Times Roman
title_full Font effects on reading parameters: comparing Radner Reading Charts printed in Helvetica and Times Roman
title_fullStr Font effects on reading parameters: comparing Radner Reading Charts printed in Helvetica and Times Roman
title_full_unstemmed Font effects on reading parameters: comparing Radner Reading Charts printed in Helvetica and Times Roman
title_short Font effects on reading parameters: comparing Radner Reading Charts printed in Helvetica and Times Roman
title_sort font effects on reading parameters: comparing radner reading charts printed in helvetica and times roman
topic Miscellaneous
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9477910/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35471739
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00417-022-05665-y
work_keys_str_mv AT radnerwolfgang fonteffectsonreadingparameterscomparingradnerreadingchartsprintedinhelveticaandtimesroman
AT radnermichael fonteffectsonreadingparameterscomparingradnerreadingchartsprintedinhelveticaandtimesroman
AT daxerbarbara fonteffectsonreadingparameterscomparingradnerreadingchartsprintedinhelveticaandtimesroman
AT beneschthomas fonteffectsonreadingparameterscomparingradnerreadingchartsprintedinhelveticaandtimesroman
AT ettlarmin fonteffectsonreadingparameterscomparingradnerreadingchartsprintedinhelveticaandtimesroman