skip to main content
article

The effects of subpixel addressing on users' performance and preferences during reading-related tasks

Published:01 October 2004Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Subpixel addressing is a font-rendering technology that triples the apparent horizontal resolution of liquid crystal displays. Four experiments measured the effects of subpixel addressing (Microsoft's ClearType) relative to standard (aliased) font-rendering techniques. Participants preferred, and gave higher readability ratings to, text that had been rendered using subpixel addressing. Subpixel addressing also significantly improved the accuracy of lexical decisions and the accuracy and speed of sentence comprehension. Subpixel addressing did not affect word-naming performance or reading speed during pleasure reading. Taken together, these findings suggest that subpixel addressing provides substantial benefits to users while adding no costs to display hardware.

References

  1. Anstis, S. M. 1974. A chart demonstrating variations in acuity with retinal position. Vis. Res. 14, 589--592.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrews, S. and Heathcote, A. 2001. Distinguishing common and task-specific processes in word identification: A matter of some moment? J. Exp. Psychol.: Hum. Percept. Perform. 27, 2, 514--540.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Betrisey, C., Blinn, J. F., Dresevic, B., Hill, B., Hitchcock, G., Keely, B., Mitchell, D. P., Platt, J. C., and Whitted, T. 1999. Displaced filtering for patterned displays. In Society for Information Display 1999 Digest of Technical Papers. 296--299.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Brysbaert, M. M., Vitu, F., and Schoyens, W. 1996. The right visual field advantage and the optimal viewing position effect: On the relation between foveal and parafoveal word recognition. Neuropsychology 10, 3, 385--395.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Carroll, J. B., Davies, P., and Richman, H. 1971. Word Frequency Book. American Heritage Publishing Co., Inc., USA, 563--752.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Chaparro, A. and Young, R. S. L. 1993. Reading with rods: The superiority of central vision for rapid reading. Invest. Ophthal. Vis. Sci. 34, 7, 2341--2347.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. de Groot, A. M. B., Borgwaldt, S., Bos, M., and van den Eijnden, E. 2002. Lexical decision and word naming in bilinguals: Language effects and task effects. J. Mem. Lang. 47, 1, 91--124.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Dunlap, W. P., Cortina, J. M., Vaslow, J. B., and Burke, M. J. 1996. Meta-analysis of experiments with matched groups or repeated measures designs. Psychol. Methods 1, 2, 170--177.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Federmeier, K. D. and Kutas, M. 1999. Right words and left words: Electrophysiological evidence for hemispheric differences in meaning processing. Cognitive Brain Res. 8, 373--392.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Gould, J. D., Lizette, A., Finn, R., Haupt, B., and Minuto, A. 1987. Reading from CRT displays can be as fast as reading from paper. Hum. Factors 29, 5, 497--517. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Harpster, G. L., Freivalds, A., Shulman, G. L., and Leibowitz, H. W. 1989. Visual performance on CRT screens and hard-copy displays. Hum. Factors 31, 247--257. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Nazir, T. A., Heller, D., and Sussmann, C. 1992. Letter visibility and word recognition: The optimal viewing position in printed words. Percept. Psychophys. 52, 3, 315--328.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Nazir, T. A., Jacobs, A., and O'Regan, J. K. 1998. Letter legibility and visual word recognition. Mem. Cognition 26, 4, 810--821.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Nielsen, J. 2000. Designing Web Usability: The Practice Of Simplicity. New Riders Publishing, Indianapolis, IN. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. O'Regan, J. K. and Jacobs, A. M. 1992. Optimal viewing position effect in word recognition: A challenge to current theory. J. Exp. Psychol.: Hum. Percept. Perform. 18, 1, 185--197.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Paap, K., McDonald, J., Schvaneveldt, R., and Noel, R. 1987. Frequency and pronounceability in visually presented naming and lexical decision tasks. In Attention and Performance XII: The Psychology of Reading, M. Coltheart, Ed. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 221--244.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Pexman, P., Lupker, S., and Hino, Y. 2001. The impact of feedback semantics in visual word recognition: Number of features effects in lexical decision and word naming tasks. In Proceedings of the Twenty-third Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Edinburgh, Scotland.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Rayner, K. and Pollatsek, A. 1989. The Psychology of Reading. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Riggs, L. A., 1965. Visual acuity. In Vision and Visual Perception, C. H. Grahm, N. R. Bartlett, J. C. Brown, Y. Hsia, L. G. Mueller, and L. A. Riggs, Eds. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 321--349.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Rowley and Traub. 1977. Formula scoring, number right scoring, and test-taking strategy. J. Educ. Meas. 14, 1, 15--22.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Siegel, S. and Castellan, N. J. 1988. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Sheedy, J. E. and McCarthy, M. 1994. Reading performance and visual comfort with scale to gray compared with black-and-white scanned print. Displays 15, 1, 27--30.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Stoker, B. 1897. Dracula. Archibald Constable and Company, Westminster.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Tinker, M. A. and Paterson, D. G. 1941. Eye movements in reading a modern type face and Old English. Am. J. Psychol. 54, 113--115.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Tinker, M. A. and Paterson, D. G. 1955. The effect of typographical variations upon eye movement in reading. J. Educ. Res. 49, 171--183.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Tinker, M. A. 1965. Bases for Effective Reading. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, 115--201.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. von der Luehe, M. 2003. Overall growth is steady in internet connections, but broadband increases by 36% in past 6 months. Press release, accessed at www.nielsen-netratings.com, on 8/30/2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Wright, S. L., Bailey, I. L., Tuan, K. M., and Wacker, R. T. 1999. Resolution and legibility: A comparison on TFT-LCD's and CRT's. J. SID 7, 4, 253--256.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Wickens, C. D. and Hollands, J. 2000. Engineering Psychology and Human Performance. Prentice Hall, New York, NY.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. The effects of subpixel addressing on users' performance and preferences during reading-related tasks

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image ACM Transactions on Applied Perception
      ACM Transactions on Applied Perception  Volume 1, Issue 2
      October 2004
      75 pages
      ISSN:1544-3558
      EISSN:1544-3965
      DOI:10.1145/1024083
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2004 ACM

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 1 October 2004
      Published in tap Volume 1, Issue 2

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • article

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader