The Influence of Font Type on Information Recall.

Previous research on reading has primarily focused on the cognitive and neurological aspects of learning to read and reading disabilities. In this study, the physical characteristics of the text itself were examined in an applied setting. Specifically, the influence of two common characteristics of font types (serif or san serif markings and proportional or mono-spacing) on recall of information was investigated. The participants were college students (N = 149). Each participant received a one page discussion of Tuberculosis, in the form of an office memorandum distributed in a health care facility, and was then tested on recall of the important points discussed in the memorandum. Serif fonts significantly improved recall of the information. Do the physical characteristics of the font used in a passage of text influence the recall of what is read? Although research on reading has a long history in psychology, the majority of this research has been on reading disabilities and learning to read (Aaron, Joshi, & Williams, 1999; Chiappe, Hasher, & Siegel, 2000; Guthrie, Shafer, Von Sekler, & Alban, 2000; Smith, 1998). These studies have primarily focused on the neurological and cognitive aspects of reading. This study was conducted to find an answer to an applied question. As part of a consulting project with a local organization, we were asked if the font used in an inter-office memo had any influence on how well the information in the memo would be remembered. The purpose of this study is to answer that question by examining the influence of two common characteristics of font types--the presence of serif or san serif markings and proportional or mono spacing--on recall of information presented in an office memorandum. Prior research has focused on how the passage length of text may influence comprehension of the material. Surber (1992) found that when participants were given either a long or short textbook passage to study, those who read the shorter passages spent substantially more time per word studying than did those who were given the long passage. This occurred, Surber speculated, because readers given the short passages were engaging in greater depth of processing of the material (Surber, 1992). This finding and Surber's explanation coincides with the attentional resources theory provided by Kanfer and Ackerman (1989). In this model, Kanfer and Ackerman suggest that humans have limited attentional resources that they can devote to a task. If less attention is given to the process of reading the text, then more attention can be given to attending to the message in the text. Prior research has also examined how distractions in texts may influence readability and comprehension. Connelly, Hasher, & Zacks (1991) showed that older adults are less able to ignore irrelevant stimuli (such as distracting text in italics interspersed amid target text), and as a result read more slowly and show poorer comprehension than younger adults. This effect of distraction continued even when the distracting text contained content that was related to the target text. Carlson, Hasher, Connelly, and Zacks (1995) also found that when distractions (e.g., a phrase in a different font than the target text) were randomly placed within the text, a marked disruptive effect on reading occurred. This effect was particularly severe in older adults. Further research that focused specifically on the characteristics of the font indicates that the legibility of the font type is another important factor to consider in readability and reading comprehension. Tinker (1963) examined the effects of font size and font legibility on reading speed and comprehension. He organized two sets of conditions to give to participants: (a) material set in 10-point Roman lower-case type on eggshell paper stock which was deemed very legible (b) material set in 8-point italic type on eggshell paper stock which was deemed to be poorly legible. …