Article published in:
Information Design Journal
Vol. 22:1 (2016) ► pp. 318
Beier, S
(2012) Reading letters: designing for legibility. Amsterdam: BIS Publishers.Google Scholar
(2013) Legibility investigations: controlling typeface variables. Praxis and Poetics: Research through Design, Conference Proceedings (pp. 92–95). Newcastle upon Tyne and Gateshead.
Bringhurst, R
(1992) The elements of typographic style. Point Roberts, WA: Hartley & Marks Publishers.Google Scholar
Dyson, M.C
(2014) Applying psychological theory to typography: is how we perceive letterforms special? In D. Machin (Ed.), Visual Communication (pp. 215–242). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Frutiger, A
(1998) Signs and symbols: their design and meaning. London: Ebury Press.Google Scholar
Gauthier, I., Wong, A.C.-N., Hayward, W.G., & Cheung, O.S
(2006) Font tuning associated with expertise in letter perception. Perception, 351, 541–559. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Haber, R.N., & Hershenson, M
(1980) The psychology of visual perception. New York, London: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Legge, G.E
(2007) Psychophysics of reading in normal and low vision. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Medler, D.A., & Binder, J.R
(2005) MCWord: An On-Line Orthographic Database of the English Language. http://​www​.neuro​.mcw​.edu​/mcword/
O’Brien, F., & Cousineau, D
(2014) Representing error bars in within-subject designs in typical software packages. The Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 10(1), 56–67. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rastle, K
(2007) Visual word recognition. In M.G. Gaskell (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Psycholinguistics (pp. 71–88). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sanocki, T
(1987) Visual knowledge underlying letter perception: font-specific schematic tuning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13(2), 267–278. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1988) Font regularity constraints on the process of letter recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14(3), 472–480. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1991a) Intrapattern and interpattern relations in letter recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 171, 924–941. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1991b) Looking for a structural network: effects of changing size and style on letter recognition. Perception, 20(4), 529–541. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tinker, M.A
(1965) Bases for effective reading. Minneapolis: Lund Press.Google Scholar
Walker, P
(2008) Font tuning: A review and new experimental evidence. Visual Cognition, 16(8), 1022–1058. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 7 other publications

Beier, Sofie & Chiron A.T. Oderkerk
2019. Smaller visual angles show greater benefit of letter boldness than larger visual angles. Acta Psychologica 199  pp. 102904 ff. Crossref logo
Beier, Sofie, Chiron A. T. Oderkerk, Birte Bay & Michael Larsen
2021. Increased letter spacing and greater letter width improve reading acuity in low vision readers. Information Design Journal 26:1  pp. 73 ff. Crossref logo
Bigelow, Charles
2019. Typeface features and legibility research. Vision Research 165  pp. 162 ff. Crossref logo
Chow, Kenny K. N. & Kin Wai Michael Siu
2018.  In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Conference Companion Publication on Designing Interactive Systems,  pp. 303 ff. Crossref logo
Oderkerk, Chiron A. T. & Sofie Beier
2021. Fonts of wider letter shapes improve letter recognition in parafovea and periphery. Ergonomics  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Thiessen, Myra, Sofie Beier & Hannah Keage
2020. A Review of the Cognitive Effects of Disfluent Typography on Functional Reading. The Design Journal 23:5  pp. 797 ff. Crossref logo
XIE, Zhipeng, XIAO, Tingting & QIN, Huanyu
2021. Typeface effect in marketing. Advances in Psychological Science 29:2  pp. 365 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 april 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.