Slashdot Mirror
Hard-to-Read Fonts Improve Learning
arkenian writes "Difficult-to-read fonts make for better learning, according to scientists. The finding is about to be published in the international journal Cognition. Researchers at Princeton University employed volunteers to learn made-up information about different types of aliens — and found that those reading harder fonts recalled more when tested 15 minutes later. The article goes on to note a second test in a real school environment: 'Keen to see if their findings actually worked in practice, the Princeton University team then tested their results on 222 students aged between 15 and 18 at a secondary school in Chesterfield, Ohio.'... 'Students given the harder-to-read materials scored higher in their classroom assessments than those in the control group. This was the case across a range of subjects — from English, to Physics to History.'"
I'd like to know the long term effect of this. What if the brain develops a better comprehension of the hard-to-read fonts, rendering all the re-printing meaningless?
Lets just write all text books in captchas.
...
Instead of skimming, you are forced to actually read every word.
Skimming is for getting an idea of what to expect to learn. Reading is for the actual learning.
I think it's obvious (heh heh) that it forces you to think about the content in order to read it, when using a font which requires no conscious thought to process results in more flow with less processing and thus less retention. Perhaps future systems will sense the user's level of interest and change fonts dynamically to keep them learning.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
If you're asking someone to absorb fluff (like nonsense about aliens) then perhaps it's a good idea to manufacture 'disfluency' with odd fonts and the like.
If you're asking someone to absorb difficult material (like Knuth or advanced physics) then you want to minimize other sources of 'disfluency'.
The comparative readability of Arial is not the same on-screen and on paper. Here's the account in the Economist: Learning difficulties. It mentions "tests" that had determined readability, but alas no reference to the specific study.
Set your phasers on "funky"!
Lots of people can remember things that were written in fancy script, like parts of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution*.
Come to think of it, this bodes well for my kid's lousy writing - people will at least remember what she wrote, once they decipher it.
*Exception made for Christine O'Donnell
Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
Slashdot please allow me to post in Wingdings font and Symbol font. Posting in Italics TT does not make it not hard enough to read.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Because it seems counter-intuitive, I really liked the following sentence:
...Keen to see if their findings actually worked in practice..."
Often times we see studies done in labs and, because it doesn't look reasonable to us, we quickly dismiss it by saying "Well, it would never work in real life." Here, at least, they tried it in real life. It's not a long-term study, so there are still shortcomings, but it's better than the usual Social Studies experiments.
Whenever in an argument, remember this.
Ok, what about having to read all courses in illegible fonts. will the time allotted suffice?
It's rather obvious that slowing down the reading gives better retention, this fact is well known within psychology and cognitive science. But using this method of slowing students down may impact their overall score, as they don't have time to read everything they are supposed to.
110 out of 100 in history, 5 out of 100 in psychology because you only managed to read the first chapter..
Pay no attention to 'WindWraith'. You're doing it right.
*shakes fist at 'WindWraith' for discouraging good behavior/mindset*
I envy youth and their good eyesight. Hell, I miss my own good eyesight when I was younger!
As an 'older than dirt, had to fight dinosaurs on my ten mile trek[one way] UPHILL, in a blizzard/sandstorm- both ways! to school everyday' crowd, I appreciate your efforts and way of thinking about web page design.
As an avid reader, I appreciate good text fonts both in real paper books, and various forms of e-books.
Tri-focal lenses, macular degeneration, and just plain old age changes your perspective and outlook!
I frequently read some comments here regarding screen resolution[and similar], and am struck with both amusement and envy. I seem to ask myself EVERY time two questions anymore:
How do they even see/distinguish crap that small?
Why are they going through that hassle?
Damn, I'm REALLY getting old!
BTW, if you are reading this reply, 'WindWraith', please take the comment as 'tongue-in-cheek' humour/sarcasm.
You do provide a valid and insightful comment about memories, IMHO.
Oh yeah, obligatory...
Hey you young punks, get off my lawn!
Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
bu7 i g07 b4d gr4d35 w|-|3|\| i 4pp1i3d my k|\|0w13dg3.
Arial? Verdana, my friend. Arial is a cheap whore compared to the lady Verdana. Guess why Arial was created by Microsoft originally?
It wasn't created by Microsoft. It was originally made for IBM by Monotype in the early 80s, when it was known as Sonoran Sans (similarly, Times New Roman was originally called Sonoran Serif). Microsoft then licensed these from Monotype and renamed them Arial and TNR, respectively. But don't let little facts get in the way of your hatred of Microsoft.