Volume 26, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0142-5471
  • E-ISSN: 1569-979X



Low vision readers depend on magnification, but magnification reduces the amount of text that can be overviewed and hampers text navigation. In this study, we evaluate the effects that font variations letter spacing, letter width, and letter boldness have on low vision reading. We tested 20 low-vision patients with age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and used the Radner Reading Chart, which measures reading acuity (logRAD), maximum reading speed, and critical print size. The results demonstrated a small, but measurable effect of letter spacing and letter width on reading acuity near critical font sizes.

Available under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license.

Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...



  1. Action for blind people
    Action for blind people (2004) Making it clear: Guidelines to producing printed material for people who are blind or partially sighted. Retrieved fromhttps://s27807.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/making_it_clear_guidelines-afsl.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Ahrens, T., & Mugikura, S.
    (2014) Size-specific adjustments to type designs: An investigation of the principles guiding the design of optical sizes. Just Another Foundry.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Alió, J. L., Radner, W., Plaza-Puche, A. B., Ortiz, D., Neipp, C. M., Quiles, J. M., & Rodríguez-Marín, J.
    (2008) Design of short Spanish sentences for measuring reading performance: Radner-Vissum test: Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery, 34(4), 638–642. doi:  10.1016/j.jcrs.2007.11.046
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrs.2007.11.046 [Google Scholar]
  4. Arditi, A., Knoblauch, K., & Grunwald, I.
    (1990) Reading with fixed and variable character pitch’, Journal of the Optical Society of America, 7(10), 2011–2015. doi:  10.1364/JOSAA.7.002011
    https://doi.org/10.1364/JOSAA.7.002011 [Google Scholar]
  5. Arditi, Aries
    (2017) Rethinking ADA signage standards for low-vision accessibility. Journal of Vision, 17(5), 8–8. doi:  10.1167/17.5.8
    https://doi.org/10.1167/17.5.8 [Google Scholar]
  6. Arditi, Aries, & Cho, J.
    (2005) Serifs and font legibility. Vision Research, 45(23), 2926–2933. doi:  10.1016/j.visres.2005.06.013
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2005.06.013 [Google Scholar]
  7. Baines, P.
    (2004) The end of typography: Slow death by default. Eye Magazine, Spring.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Bateman, S., Gutwin, C., & Nacenta, M.
    (2008) Seeing things in the clouds: The effect of visual features on tag cloud selections. InProceedings of the nineteenth ACM conference on Hypertext and hypermedia (pp.193–202). doi:  10.1145/1379092.1379130
    https://doi.org/10.1145/1379092.1379130 [Google Scholar]
  9. Beier, S.
    (2016) Letterform Research: An academic orphan. Visible Language, 50(2), 64.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. (2017) Type Tricks: Your personal guide to type design. BIS Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Beier, S., Bernard, J.-B., & Castet, E.
    (2018) Numeral legibility and visual complexity. InDRS Design Research Society, 2018: Limerick. doi:  10.21606/drs.2018.246
    https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2018.246 [Google Scholar]
  12. Beier, S., & Dyson, M. C.
    (2014) The influence of serifs on ‘h’ and ‘i’: Useful knowledge from design-led scientific research. Visible Language, 47(3), 74–95.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Beier, S., & Larson, K.
    (2010) Design Improvements for Frequently Misrecognized Letters. Information Design Journal, 18(2), 118–137. doi:  10.1075/idj.18.2.03bei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.18.2.03bei [Google Scholar]
  14. Beier, S., & Oderkerk, C. A. T.
    (2019a) The effect of age and font on reading ability. Visible Language, 53(3), 51–69.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. (2019b) Smaller visual angles show greater benefit of letter boldness than larger visual angles. Acta Psychologica, 199, 102904. doi:  10.1016/j.actpsy.2019.102904
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2019.102904 [Google Scholar]
  16. Bernard, M., Liao, C. H., & Mills, M.
    (2001) The effects of font type and size on the legibility and reading time of online text by older adults. InCHI’01 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems (pp.175–176). doi:  10.1145/634067.634173
    https://doi.org/10.1145/634067.634173 [Google Scholar]
  17. Bouma, H.
    (1970) Interaction effects in parafoveal letter recognition. Nature, 226, 177–178. doi:  10.1038/226177a0
    https://doi.org/10.1038/226177a0 [Google Scholar]
  18. Brown, J. C., Goldstein, J. E., Chan, T. L., Massof, R., Ramulu, P., & Low Vision Research Network Study Group
    (2014) Characterizing functional complaints in patients seeking outpatient low-vision services in the United States. Ophthalmology, 121(8), 1655–1662. doi:  10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.02.030
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.02.030 [Google Scholar]
  19. Burggraaff, M. C., van Nispen, R. M. A., Hoek, S., Knol, D. L., & van Rens, G. H. M. B.
    (2010) Feasibility of the Radner Reading Charts in low-vision patients. Graefe’s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 248(11), 1631–1637. doi:  10.1007/s00417‑010‑1402‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-010-1402-1 [Google Scholar]
  20. Burmistrov, I., Zlokazova, T., Ishmuratova, I., & Semenova, M.
    (2016) Legibility of light and ultra-light fonts: Eye tracking study. InProceedings of the 9th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp.1–6). doi:  10.1145/2971485.2996745
    https://doi.org/10.1145/2971485.2996745 [Google Scholar]
  21. Calossi, A., Boccardo, L., Fossetti, A., & Radner, W.
    (2014) Design of short Italian sentences to assess near vision performance. Journal of Optometry, 7(4), 203–209. doi:  10.1016/j.optom.2014.05.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optom.2014.05.001 [Google Scholar]
  22. Carter, H.
    (1937) Optical scale in typefounding. Typography, 4, 2–6.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Chung, S. T. L.
    (2014) Size or spacing: Which limits letter recognition in people with age-related macular degeneration?Vision Research, 101, 167–176. doi:  10.1016/j.visres.2014.06.015
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2014.06.015 [Google Scholar]
  24. Chung, S. T. L., & Bernard, J.-B.
    (2018) Bolder print does not increase reading speed in people with central vision loss. Vision Research, 153, 98–104. doi:  10.1016/j.visres.2018.10.012
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2018.10.012 [Google Scholar]
  25. Chung, S. T. L., Mansfield, J. S., & Legge, G. E.
    (1998) Psychophysics of reading. XVIII. The effect of print size on reading speed in normal peripheral vision. Vision Research, 38(19), 2949–2962. doi:  10.1016/S0042‑6989(98)00072‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0042-6989(98)00072-8 [Google Scholar]
  26. Dobres, J., Reimer, B., Parikhal, L., Wean, E., & Chahine, N.
    (2015) The Incredible Shrinking Letter: How Font Size Affects the Legibility of Text Viewed in Brief Glances. InProceedings of the 8th International Driving Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training, and Vehicle Design: driving assessment 2015 (pp.435–442). doi:  10.17077/drivingassessment.1605
    https://doi.org/10.17077/drivingassessment.1605 [Google Scholar]
  27. Dyson, M. C., & Beier, S.
    (2016) Investigating typographic differentiation: Italics are more subtle than bold for emphasis. Information Design Journal, 22(1), 3–18. doi:  10.1075/idj.22.1.02dys
    https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.22.1.02dys [Google Scholar]
  28. Fletcher, D. C., Schuchard, R. A., & Watson, G.
    (1999) Relative locations of macular scotomas near the PRL: effect on low vision reading. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 36(4), 356–364.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Galvin, K. [Google Scholar]
  30. Garvey, P. M., Zineddin, A. Z., & Pietrucha, M. T.
    (2001) Letter legibility for signs and other large format applications. InProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 45(18), 1443–1447. doi:  10.1177/154193120104501828
    https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120104501828 [Google Scholar]
  31. Garvey, P. M., Eie, W.-Y., & Klenna, M. J.
    (2016) The effect of font characteristics on large format display. Interdisciplinary Journal of Signage and Wayfinding, 1(1). doi:  10.15763/issn.2470‑9670.2016.v1.i1.a3
    https://doi.org/10.15763/issn.2470-9670.2016.v1.i1.a3 [Google Scholar]
  32. Hess, R. F., Dakin, S. C., & Kapoor, N.
    (2000) The foveal ‘crowding’ effect: Physics or physiology?Vision Research, 40(4), 365–370. doi:  10.1016/S0042‑6989(99)00193‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0042-6989(99)00193-5 [Google Scholar]
  33. Kingery, D., & Furuta, R.
    (1997) Skimming electronic newspaper headlines: A study of typeface, point size, screen resolution, and monitor size. Information Processing & Management, 33(5), 685–696. doi:  10.1016/S0306‑4573(97)00025‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-4573(97)00025-3 [Google Scholar]
  34. Kitchel, J.
    (2013) APH guidelines for print document design. https://www.aph.org/aph-guidelines-for-print-document-design
  35. Larson, K., & Carter, M.
    (2016) Sitka: A collaboration between type design and science. InM. C. Dyson & C. Y. Suen (Eds.), Digital Fonts and Reading (Vol.1, pp.37–53). World Scientific. doi:  10.1142/9789814759540_0003
    https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814759540_0003 [Google Scholar]
  36. Legge, G. E., Rubin, G. S., Pelli, D. G., & Schleske, M. M.
    (1985) Psychophysics of reading – II. Low vision. Vision Research, 25(2), 253–265. doi:  10.1016/0042‑6989(85)90118‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0042-6989(85)90118-X [Google Scholar]
  37. Liu, L., & Arditi, A.
    (2001) How crowding affects letter confusion. Optometry & Vision Science, 78(1), 50–55. doi:  10.1097/00006324‑200101010‑00014
    https://doi.org/10.1097/00006324-200101010-00014 [Google Scholar]
  38. Maaijwee, K., Mulder, P., Radner, W., & Van Meurs, J. C.
    (2008) Reliability testing of the Dutch version of the Radner Reading Charts. Optometry and Vision Science, 85(5), 353–358. doi:  10.1097/OPX.0b013e31816bf58b
    https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0b013e31816bf58b [Google Scholar]
  39. Mansfield, J. S., Legge, G. E., & Bane, M. C.
    (1996) Psychophysics of reading. XV: Font effects in normal and low vision. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 37(8), 1492–1501.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Morris, R. A., Aquilante, K., Yager, D., & Bigelow, C.
    (2002) P-13: Serifs slow RSVP reading at very small sizes, but don’t matter at larger sizes. InSID Symposium Digest of Technical Papers, 33(1), 244–247. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. doi:  10.1889/1.1830242
    https://doi.org/10.1889/1.1830242 [Google Scholar]
  41. Munch, I. C., Jørgensen, A. R., & Radner, W.
    (2016) The Danish version of the Radner Reading Chart: Design and empirical testing of sentence optotypes in subjects of varying educational background. Acta Ophthalmologica, 94(2), 182–186. doi:  10.1111/aos.12845
    https://doi.org/10.1111/aos.12845 [Google Scholar]
  42. Neelam, K., Nolan, J., Chakravarthy, U., & Beatty, S.
    (2009) Psychophysical Function in Age-related Maculopathy. Survey of Ophthalmology, 54(2), 167–210. doi:  10.1016/j.survophthal.2008.12.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.survophthal.2008.12.003 [Google Scholar]
  43. Pušnik, N., Podlesek, A., & Možina, K.
    (2016) Typeface comparison – Does the x-height of lower-case letters increased to the size of upper-case letters speed up recognition?International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 54, 164–169. doi:  10.1016/j.ergon.2016.06.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2016.06.002 [Google Scholar]
  44. Radner, W.
    (2017) Reading charts in ophthalmology. Graefe’s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 255(8), 1465–1482. doi:  10.1007/s00417‑017‑3659‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-017-3659-0 [Google Scholar]
  45. Radner, W., & Diendorfer, G.
    (2014) English sentence optotypes for measuring reading acuity and speed – The English version of the RADNER Reading Charts. Graefe’s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 252(8), 1297–1303. doi:  10.1007/s00417‑014‑2646‑y
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-014-2646-y [Google Scholar]
  46. Radner, Wolfgang, Obermayer, W., Richter-Mueksch, S., Willinger, U., Velikay-Parel, M., & Eisenwort, B.
    (2002) The validity and reliability of short German sentences for measuring reading speed. Graefe’s Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 240(6), 461–467. doi:  10.1007/s00417‑002‑0443‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-002-0443-5 [Google Scholar]
  47. Rasmussen, A., Bloch, S. B., Fuchs, J., Hansen, L. H., Larsen, M., LaCour, M., Lund-Andersen, H., & Sander, B.
    (2013) A 4-year longitudinal study of 555 patients treated with ranibizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology, 120(12), 2630–2636. doi:  10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.05.018
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.05.018 [Google Scholar]
  48. Rasmussen, A., Brandi, S., Fuchs, J., Hansen, L. H., Lund-Andersen, H., Sander, B., & Larsen, M.
    (2015) Visual outcomes in relation to time to treatment in neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Acta Ophthalmologica, 93(7), 616–620. doi:  10.1111/aos.12781
    https://doi.org/10.1111/aos.12781 [Google Scholar]
  49. Rosa, A. M., Farinha, C. L., Radner, W., Diendorfer, G., Loureiro, M. F., & Murta, J. N.
    (2016) Development of the Portuguese version of a standardized reading test: The Radner-Coimbra Charts. Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia, 79(4), 238–242. doi:  10.5935/0004‑2749.20160068
    https://doi.org/10.5935/0004-2749.20160068 [Google Scholar]
  50. Sheedy, J. E., Subbaram, M. V., Zimmerman, A. B., & Hayes, J. R.
    (2005) Text legibility and the letter superiority effect. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 47(4), 797–815. doi:  10.1518/001872005775570998
    https://doi.org/10.1518/001872005775570998 [Google Scholar]
  51. Smuc, M., Windhager, F., Siebenhandl, K., & Egger, S.
    (2007) Impaired Visibility Typeface Test– Report. Report In-Safety A, 2.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Soleimani, H., & Mohammadi, E.
    (2012) The effect of text typographical features on legibility, comprehension, and retrieval of EFL learners. English Language Teaching, 5(8), 207. doi:  10.5539/elt.v5n8p207
    https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n8p207 [Google Scholar]
  53. Szpiro, S. F. A., Hashash, S., Zhao, Y., & Azenkot, S.
    (2016) How people with low vision access computing devices: Understanding challenges and opportunities. InProceedings of the 18th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (pp.171–180). doi:  10.1145/2982142.2982168
    https://doi.org/10.1145/2982142.2982168 [Google Scholar]
  54. Tarita-Nistor, L., Lam, D., Brent, M. H., Steinbach, M. J., & González, E. G.
    (2013) Courier: A better font for reading with age-related macular degeneration. Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology/Journal Canadien d’Ophtalmologie, 48(1), 56–62. doi:  10.1016/j.jcjo.2012.09.017
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjo.2012.09.017 [Google Scholar]
  55. Tracy, W.
    (1986) Letters of credit: A view of type design. London: Gordon Fraser.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Tunold, S., Radianti, J., Gjøsæter, T., & Chen, W.
    (2019) Perceivability of Map Information for Disaster Situations for People with Low Vision. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 342–352. doi:  10.1007/978‑3‑030‑23560‑4_25
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23560-4_25 [Google Scholar]
  57. Unger, G.
    (2018) Theory of type design. nai010.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Virsu, V., & Rovamo, J.
    (1979) Visual resolution, contrast sensitivity, and the cortical magnification factor. Experimental Brain Research, 37(3), 475–494. doi:  10.1007/BF00236818
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00236818 [Google Scholar]
  59. Wallace, J. M., Chung, S. T. L., & Tjan, B. S.
    (2017) Object crowding in age-related macular degeneration. Journal of Vision, 17(1), 33. doi:  10.1167/17.1.33
    https://doi.org/10.1167/17.1.33 [Google Scholar]
  60. Waller, R.
    (2007) Comparing typefaces for airport signs. Information Design Journal, 15(1), 1–15. doi:  10.1075/idj.15.1.01wal
    https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.15.1.01wal [Google Scholar]
  61. Wong, W. L., Su, X., Li, X., Cheung, C. M. G., Klein, R., Cheng, C.-Y., & Wong, T. Y.
    (2014) Global prevalence of age-related macular degeneration and disease burden projection for 2020 and 2040: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet Global Health, 2(2), e106–e116. doi:  10.1016/S2214‑109X(13)70145‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(13)70145-1 [Google Scholar]
  62. Xiong, Y.-Z., Lorsung, E. A., Mansfield, J. S., Bigelow, C., & Legge, G. E.
    (2018) Fonts Designed for Macular Degeneration: Impact on Reading. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 59(10), 4182–4189. doi:  10.1167/iovs.18‑24334
    https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.18-24334 [Google Scholar]
  63. Yager, D., Aquilante, K., & Plass, R.
    (1998) High and low luminance letters, acuity reserve, and font effects on reading speed. Vision Research, 38(17), 2527–2531. doi:  10.1016/S0042‑6989(98)00116‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0042-6989(98)00116-3 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): font; legibility; letter spacing; letter width; low vision
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error