Calendar

May 22

Knowing (by) Designing 2013

May 27

13th Intl. Conf. on New Interfaces for Musical Expression

May 28

Graphics Interface 2013

May 20

“ The moment clients realize that revisions are not an all-you-can-eat buffet, suddenly they realize they are not hungry. ”

-- Lester Beall

Share this quote on...
Get more quotes via RSS or by joining our Usability Quote of the Day Facebook Page

Featured chapter

Read the fascinating history of Wearable Computing, told by its father, Steve Mann

Read Steve's chapter !

Help us help you!

Spread the word:
Donate
Other ways to help

Barry R. Stock

Add description

← Button will not work: You have not enabled Javascript. How do I enable it?

Rename / change spelling

Add publication

← Button will not work: You have not enabled Javascript. How do I enable it?

Publications by Barry R. Stock (bibliography)

1992

Edit | Del

Braun, Curt C., Silver, N. Clayton and Stock, Barry R. (1992): Likelihood of Reading Warnings: The Effect of Fonts and Font Sizes. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 36th Annual Meeting 1992. pp. 926-930.

“Legibility of a warning is a major issue in the labeling of various consumer products, and over the counter and prescription drugs. The purpose of the present research was to examine certain variables that are associated with legibility, namely font type, font weight, point size, and point size contrast between the signal word and the main body of the warning. A sample of undergraduate students and elderly people rated 24 Ultra Tide detergent labels for their likelihood to read the warning, the saliency of the warning, and readability of the warning. The results indicated that participants were more likely to read the warning in Helvetica type than in Times or Goudy. Times was more likely to be read than Goudy. Bold type was more likely to be read than Roman type. There was a greater likelihood of reading the warning when the main body was in 10 point size as compared to 8 point size. A 2 point size difference between the signal word and the main body of the warning produced a greater likelihood of reading the warning over a 4 point size difference. One possibility for this result is that the 4 point difference minimizes the importance of the main body of the warning, therefore making only the signal word salient.”

Add publication