Showing papers on "Typeface published in 1982"
TL;DR: In this article, two groups of people (design students and university students) rated twelve different typefaces on a number of semantic rating scales and found that the differences between the factor scores revealed both general similarities of pattern and marked discrepancies on certain factors for most of the typefaces.
Abstract: Two groups of people (design students and university students) rated twelve different typefaces on a number of semantic rating scales. Analysis of the data revealed four major semantic dimensions. Comparisons between the factor scores for the two groups of people revealed both general similarities of pattern and marked discrepancies on certain factors for most of the typefaces. It was concluded that designers must be aware of the fact that their audience may perceive the semantic qualities of typefaces differently to themselves. These differences may have significant effects on the perceived appropriateness of a typeface for a given design function.
52 citations
TL;DR: This paper used the semantic differential to determine connotative meaning of ten display typefaces using laymen as subjects, and found that the only sans serif typeface was not perceived as differing significantly from serifed typefaces on most dimensions.
Abstract: This paper reports research on the use of the semantic differential to determine the connotative meaning of ten display typefaces using laymen as subjects. There were several surprising outcomes of the study. Helvetica, the only sans serif typeface, was not perceived as differing significantly from serifed typefaces on most dimensions. Examples of different typeface classifications were also perceived as having similar connotative meanings, and two very distinctive novelty typefaces were surprisingly neutral on all factoral dimensions.
46 citations
TL;DR: This paper investigated the usefulness of type for place names on atlas maps for school children and found that older children over fifteen years of age were more tolerant of a variety of typefaces.
Abstract: Little empirical consideration has been given to the usefulness of type for place names on atlas maps for school children. Most previous studies have been concerned with older map users and the conclusions from such studies have generally been applied to younger map users. This study investigates the perceptions and understanding by 160 school children in Australia and England of three different typefaces presented individually or in combination in map form. The study aims to establish which of the selected typefaces is easiest to read and which is preferred by the school children. The children overwhelmingly preferred and understood best a combination of Univers Medium and Univers Bold Condensed typefaces. Children over fifteen years of age were more tolerant of a variety of typefaces.
6 citations