Article published In:
Information Design JournalVol. 28:1 (2023) ► pp.53–92
Type does matter!
A systematic literature review on typographic considerations in publications on electronic documentation in aviation and medicine
Electronic documentation is gaining importance in aviation and medicine. However, the literature on typographic conventions is rather scattered. Therefore, this systematic literature review examined the landscape of literature addressing typography in electronic documentation in aviation and medicine. The research examined the presence of typographic considerations, level of depth, choice of medium and documentation examples. The results demonstrate that out of 65 publications, 35 address typography in varying depth and often rely on inherited misconceptions. Typographic conventions are transferred from physical to electronic mediums without questioning and remain undervalued. These findings highlight the need for improved legibility in electronic documentation.
Keywords: typography, safety, design, electronic documentation, legibility
Article outline
- Introduction
- Research design
- Literature search and screening
- Data analysis
- Results
- Presence of typographic considerations & depth of information
- Typographic considerations
- Examination of documentation examples
- Discussion
- Superficial engagement with typography & disciplinary segregation
- No differentiation between analogue and electronic documentation
- Over-reliance on generic recommendations
- Implications of findings
- Research agenda
- Conclusion
- Limitations of the research
- Data availability statement
- Disclosure of interest
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
-
References
References
Beier, S.
(2016) Letterform
Research: An academic orphan. Visible
Language,
50
(2), 64.
Beier, S., & Larson, K.
(2010) Design
Improvements for Frequently Misrecognized
Letters. Information Design
Journal,
18
1, 118–137. 
Beier, S., & Oderkerk, C. A. T.
(2022) Closed
letter counters impair recognition. Applied
Ergonomics,
101
1, 103709.
Booth, A., Sutton, A., & Papaioannou, D.
(2016) Systematic
approaches to a successful literature review: Second
edition. SAGE.
Borchard, A., Schwappach, D. L. B., Barbir, A., & Bezzola, P.
(2012) A
systematic review of the effectiveness, compliance, and critical factors for
implementation of safety checklists in
surgery. In Annals
of
surgery (Vol. 256, Issue 6, pp. 925–933).
Burian, B. K.
(2006) Design
Guidance for Emergency and Abnormal Checklists in
Aviation. Human Factors and Ergonomics
Society Annual Meeting
Proceedings,
50
(1), 106–110.
Chaparro, A., Keebler, J. R., Lazzara, E. H., & Diamond, A.
(2019) Checklists:
A review of their origins, benefits, and current uses as a cognitive aid in
medicine. Ergonomics in
Design,
27
(2), 21–26.
Clebone, A., Burian, B. K., Watkins, S. C., Gálvez, J. A., Lockman, J. L., & Heitmiller, E. S.
(2017) The
development and implementation of cognitive aids for critical events in
pediatric anesthesia: The Society for Pediatric Anesthesia Critical Events
Checklists. Anesthesia &
Analgesia,
124
(3), 900–907.
Cornelius, A. M.
(2017) Buchstaben
im Kopf. Was Kreative über das Lesen wissen sollten, um Leselust zu
gestalten. (1st
ed.). Verlag Hermann Schmidt.
Degani, A.
(1992) On
the typography of flight-deck
documentation. National Aeropnautical and Space Administration.
Degani, A., & Wiener, E. L.
(1993) Cockpit
checklists: Concepts, design, and use. Human
Factors,
35
(2), 345–359.
Evans, D., McCahon, R., Barley, M., Norris, A., Khajuria, A., & Moppett, I.
(2015) Cognitive
Aids in Medicine Assessment Tool (CMAT): Preliminary validation of a novel
tool for the assessment of emergency cognitive
aids. Anaesthesia,
70
(8), 922–932.
Federal Aviation
Administration
(1995) Human
performance considerations in the use and design of aircraft
checklists. U.S. Department of Transportation.
Filek, J.
(2013) Read/ability.
Typografie und Lesbarkeit. Niggli Verlag.
Gabriele, S.
(2006) The
Role of Typography in Differentiating Look-Alike/Sound-Alike Drug
Names. Healthcare Quarterly (Toronto, Ont.),
9 Spec
No, 88–95.
Lupton, D.
(2016) Digitised
health, medicine and risk. Health, Risk &
Society,
17
(7–8), 473–476.
Maneechaeye, P., Maneechaeye, W., & Potipiroon, W.
(2021) Operating
Room and Flight Deck: What Do These Places Have in
Common? Siriraj Medical
Journal,
73
(10), 710–720.
Mitchell, M., & Kan, L.
(2019) Digital
technology and the future of health
systems. Health Systems &
Reform,
5
(2), 113–120.
National Transportation Safety
Board
(1988) Safety
Recommendation A-88-72. National Transportation Safety Board.
Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H.
1949.
(2006) Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A
practical guide (1st
ed.). Blackwell Pub.
Pickering, C., & Byrne, J.
(2013) The
benefits of publishing systematic quantitative literature reviews for PhD
candidates and other early-career
researchers. Higher Education Research and
Development,
33
(3), 534–548.
Senbekov, M., Saliev, T., Bukeyeva, Z., Almabayeva, A., Zhanaliyeva, M., Aitenova, N., Toishibekov, Y., & Fakhradiyev, I.
(2020) The
Recent Progress and Applications of Digital Technologies in Healthcare: A
Review. International Journal of Telemedicine
and Applications 2020(Journal
Article), 8830200–8830200.
Tiefenthaler, M.
Unger, G.
(2018) Theory
of type design. Nai
010.
Verdaasdonk, E., Stassen, L., Widhiasmara, P. P., & Dankelman, J.
(2009) Requirements
for the design and implementation of checklists for surgical
processes. Surgical
Endoscopy,
23
(4), 715–726.