Psychophysics of reading. XV: Font effects in normal and low vision

Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

Volumn 37, Issue 8, 1996, Pages 1492-1501

  Mansfield, J Stephen ^a   Legge, Gordon E ^a   Bane, Mark C ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^b RETINA FOUNDATION OF THE SOUTHWEST   (United States)

Author keywords

acuity; font; low vision; normal vision; reading; typeface

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; LITERATURE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRINTING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOPHYSICS; READING; VISION; VISUAL ACUITY; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL IMPAIRMENT;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; AGING; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; FORM PERCEPTION; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; PRINTING; PSYCHOPHYSICS; READING; SIZE PERCEPTION; VISION TESTS; VISION, LOW; VISUAL ACUITY;

EID: 0029739491     PISSN: 01460404     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Tinker MA. Legibility of Print. Ames: Iowa State University Press; 1963.
2. Payne DE. Readability of typewritten material: Proportional versus standard spacing. J Typographical Res. 1967;1:125-136.
3. Beldie IP, Pastoor S, Schwarz E. Fixed versus variable letter width for televised text. Human Factors. 1983;25:273-277.
4. Arditi A, Knoblauch K, Grunwald I. Reading with fixed and variable pitch. J Opt Soc Am A. 1990;7:2011-2015.
5. Morris RA, Berry K, Hargreaves KA, Liarokapis D. How typeface variation and typographic scaling affect readability at small sizes. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Congress on Advances in Non-impact Printing Technologies. Portland: Society for Imaging Science and Technology; 1991.
6. Tielsch JM, Sommer A, Will J, Katz J, Royall RM. Blindness and visual impairment in an American urban population: The Baltimore eye survey. Arch. Opthalmol. 1990;108:286-290.
7. The Lighthouse National Survey on Vision Loss. The Experience, Attitudes and Knowledge of Middle-aged and Older Americans. New York: Lighthouse; 1995.
8. Legge GE, Rubin GS, Pelli DG, Schleske MM. Psychophysics of reading: II: Low vision. Vision Res. 1985;25:253-266.
9. Rubin GS, Legge GE. Psychophysics of reading: VI: The role of contrast in low vision. Vision Res. 1989;29:79-91.
10. Legge GE, Rubin GS. Psychophysics of reading: IV: Wavelength effects in normal and low vision. J Opt Soc Am A. 1986;3:40-51.
11. Prince JH. Relationship of reading types to uncorrectable lowered visual acuity. Am J Optom Arch Am Acad Optom. 1957;34:581-595.
12. Prince JH. New reading material for sub-normal vision subjects. Am J Optom. 1958;35:629-636.
13. Prince JH. Special print for subnormal vision. Am J Ophthalmol. 1959;48:122-124.
14. Bouma H. Interaction effects in parafoveal letter recognition. Nature. 1970;226:177-178.
15. Jacobs RJ. Visual resolution and contour interaction in the fovea and periphery. Vision Res. 1979;9:1187-1195.
16. Mansfield JS, Ahn SJ, Legge GE, Luebker A. A new reading acuity chart for normal and low vision. Ophthalmic and Visual Optics/Noninvasive Assessment of the Visual System Technical Digest. Washington: Optical Society of America. 1993;3:232-235.
17. Kucera H. Francis WN. Computational Analysis of Present Day American English. Providence: Brown University Press; 1967.
18. National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council Committee on Vision. Recommended standards for the clinical measurement and specification of visual acuity. Adv Ophthalmol. 1980;41:103-148.
19. Ferris FL, Kassoff A, Bresnick GH, Bailey IL. New visual acuity charts for clinical research. Am J Ophthalmol. 1982;94:91-96.
20. Carver RP. Word length, prose difficulty, and reading rate. J Reading Behaviour. 1976;8:193-203.
21. Legge GE, Pelli DG, Rubin GS, Schleske MM. Psychophysics of reading: I: Normal vision. Vision Res. 1985;25:239-252.
22. Mansfield JS, Legge GE, Cunningham KE, Luebker A. The effect of font on reading speed and reading acuity in normal and low vision. ARVO Abstracts. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1994;35:1554.
23. Arditi A, Cagenello R. Why reading acuity is worse than and poorly predicted by letter acuity. ARVO Abstracts. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1993;34:1417.
24. Klitz TS, Mansfield JS, Legge GE. Reading speed is affected by font transitions. ARVO Abstracts. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1995;36:S670.