ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2020
Reconciling print-size and display-size constraints on reading.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- A separable neural code in monkey IT enables perfect CAPTCHA decoding.Journal of neurophysiology · 2022Article
- Reconciling print-size and display-size constraints on reading.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Two fundamental constraints limit the number of characters in text that can be displayed at one time-print size and display size. These dual constraints conflict in two important situations-when people with normal vision read text on small digital displays, and when people with low vision read magnified text. Here, we describe a unified framework for evaluating the joint impact of these constraints on reading performance. We measured reading speed as a function of print size for three digital formats (laptop, tablet, and cellphone) for 30 normally sighted and 10 low-vision participants. Our results showed that a minimum number of characters per line is required to achieve a criterion of 80% of maximum reading speed: 13 characters for normally sighted and eight characters for low-vision readers. This critical number of characters is nearly constant across font and display format. Possible reasons for this required number of characters are discussed. Combining these character count constraints with the requirements for adequate print size reveals that an individual's use of a small digital display or the need for magnified print can shrink or entirely eliminate the range of print size necessary for achieving maximum reading speed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.