Font Fails to Improve Reading on Assessment Tasks
Faculty Advisor Name
Ashton Trice, Ed.D
Description
Dyslexie is a font type that was created specifically to address the challenges that individuals with Dyslexia face. This font-type consists of distinctive characteristics in each letter that are suggested to be more easily distinguishable from one another, such as a bolded bottom portion of each letter, additional inter-letter spacing, a greater x-height, and capitalized letters that are slightly italicized and bolded. Although the author claims that it improves the reading performance of individuals with Dyslexia, the literature on its effectiveness is conflicting. The current study investigates the effectiveness of Dyslexie compared to two commonly used fonts on readers’ comprehension and errors while reading meaningful text as well as performance on rapid automatic naming tasks.
Thirty-six fourth and fifth grade students with a Specific Learning Disability in reading were identified from two rural counties in Virginia. We developed two real word lists and one pseudoword list that were highly correlated with the word list from the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, second edition, and were presented in either Arial or Dyslexie font. Additionally, we developed three 200-word stories modeled on the Qualitative Reading Inventory, which were written at the fourth grade reading level, as measured by the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Scores. We presented each story in Arial, Times New Roman, or Dyslexie font, and had three comprehension questions that followed each passage. We gave each participant the Rapid Automatic Naming and Orthographic Processing subtests from the Feifer Assessment of Reading. Using a counter-balanced design, we exposed each participant to two lists of words, a pseudoword list, and three stories in varying font types.
When controlling for orthographic processing, we found no significant differences by font between the number of errors committed while reading real-word lists, as well as the number of words read correctly on pseudoword lists in in either font. We found no differences between Arial, Times New Roman, or Dyslexie for participants’ committed errors, reading speed, or comprehension.
Overall, no significant differences were found among reading tasks and fonts. The current study controlled for characteristics that are believed to impact the reading process, such as font size and the spacing between letters, words, and lines. It is possible that Dyslexie’s impact on readability may be a result of such factors, rather than the font style itself. It is also possible that benefits of this font are present for individuals familiar with it. While we found no support for Dyslexie, we also did not find it to be detrimental to readers. If readers appreciate the aesthetic characteristics of Dyslexie, our results suggest that they can use it with no reduction in comprehension, speed, or accuracy.
Future studies should look at the effectiveness of font alterations during sustained reading tasks and interest in the font style. Additionally, further research into the automatic recognition of words is warranted, to help provide literature regarding the cognitive impact of font styles.
Font Fails to Improve Reading on Assessment Tasks
Dyslexie is a font type that was created specifically to address the challenges that individuals with Dyslexia face. This font-type consists of distinctive characteristics in each letter that are suggested to be more easily distinguishable from one another, such as a bolded bottom portion of each letter, additional inter-letter spacing, a greater x-height, and capitalized letters that are slightly italicized and bolded. Although the author claims that it improves the reading performance of individuals with Dyslexia, the literature on its effectiveness is conflicting. The current study investigates the effectiveness of Dyslexie compared to two commonly used fonts on readers’ comprehension and errors while reading meaningful text as well as performance on rapid automatic naming tasks.
Thirty-six fourth and fifth grade students with a Specific Learning Disability in reading were identified from two rural counties in Virginia. We developed two real word lists and one pseudoword list that were highly correlated with the word list from the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, second edition, and were presented in either Arial or Dyslexie font. Additionally, we developed three 200-word stories modeled on the Qualitative Reading Inventory, which were written at the fourth grade reading level, as measured by the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Scores. We presented each story in Arial, Times New Roman, or Dyslexie font, and had three comprehension questions that followed each passage. We gave each participant the Rapid Automatic Naming and Orthographic Processing subtests from the Feifer Assessment of Reading. Using a counter-balanced design, we exposed each participant to two lists of words, a pseudoword list, and three stories in varying font types.
When controlling for orthographic processing, we found no significant differences by font between the number of errors committed while reading real-word lists, as well as the number of words read correctly on pseudoword lists in in either font. We found no differences between Arial, Times New Roman, or Dyslexie for participants’ committed errors, reading speed, or comprehension.
Overall, no significant differences were found among reading tasks and fonts. The current study controlled for characteristics that are believed to impact the reading process, such as font size and the spacing between letters, words, and lines. It is possible that Dyslexie’s impact on readability may be a result of such factors, rather than the font style itself. It is also possible that benefits of this font are present for individuals familiar with it. While we found no support for Dyslexie, we also did not find it to be detrimental to readers. If readers appreciate the aesthetic characteristics of Dyslexie, our results suggest that they can use it with no reduction in comprehension, speed, or accuracy.
Future studies should look at the effectiveness of font alterations during sustained reading tasks and interest in the font style. Additionally, further research into the automatic recognition of words is warranted, to help provide literature regarding the cognitive impact of font styles.
