Arditi, A., & Cho, J. (2007). Letter case and text legibility in normal and low vision. Vision Research, 47(19), 2499–2505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2007.06.010

Bailey, I. L., & Lovie, J. E. (1976). New design principles for visual-acuity letter charts. American Journal of Optometry and Physiological Optics, 53(11), 740–745. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006324-197611000-00006

Bartram, D. (1982). The perception of semantic quality in type: Differences between designers and non-designers. Information Design Journal, 3(1), 38–50. https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.3.1.04bar

Baudin, F. (1967). ‘Miles A. Tinker, Bases for effective reading’. Journal of Typographic Research, 1(2), 204-207. https://journals.uc.edu/index.php/vl/article/view/4998/3862

Becker, D., Heinrich, J., von Sichowsky, R., & Wendt, D. (1970). Reader preferences for typeface and leading. Journal of Typographic Research, 4(1), 61–66. https://journals.uc.edu/index.php/vl/article/view/5062

Beier, S. (2012). Reading letters: Designing for legibility. Amsterdam: BIS Publishers. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/361332642_Reading_Letters_designing_for_legibility

Beier, S. (2016). Letterform research: An academic orphan. Visible Language, 50(2), 64–79. https://journals.uc.edu/index.php/vl/article/view/5923

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. https://journals.uc.edu/index.php/vl/article/view/5875

Beier, S., & Larson, K. (2010). Design improvements for frequently misrecognized letters. Information Design Journal, 18(2), 118–137. https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.18.2.03bei

Beier, S., & Larson, K. (2013). How does typeface familiarity affect reading performance and reader preference? Information Design Journal, 20(1), 16–31. https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.20.1.02bei

Bentley, M. (1921). Leading and legibility. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 30(3), 48–61. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/h0093140

Bernard, M., Lida, B., Riley, S., Hackler, T., & Janzen, K. (2002). A comparison of popular online fonts: Which size and type is best? Usability News, 4(1). http://usabilitynews.org/a-comparison-of-popular-online-fonts-which-size-and-type-is-best/.

Bernard, M., Mills, M., Peterson, M., & Storrer, K. (2001). A comparison of popular online fonts: Which is best and when? [Electronic Version]. Usability News, 3(2). http://usabilitynews.org/a-comparison-of-popular-online-fonts-which-is-best-and-when/.

Besner, D., Coltheart, M., & Davelaar, E. (1984). Basic processes in reading: Computation of abstract letter identities. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 38(1), 126–134. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/h0080785

Beymer, D., Russell, D., & Orton, P. (2008). An eye tracking study of how font size and type influence online reading. In Proceedings of the 22nd British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: Culture, Creativity, Interaction (Vol. 2, pp. 15–18). Liverpool, UK: British Computer Society. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1531826.1531831

Bjork, R. A. (1994). Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings. In J. Metcalfe & A. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: knowing about knowing (pp. 185–205). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1994-97967-009

Boyarski, D., Neuwirth, C., Forlizzi, J., & Regli, S. H. (1998). A study of fonts designed for screen display. In C. M. Karat (Ed.), CHI 98: Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 87–94). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/274644.274658

Bringhurst, R. (1992). The elements of typographic style. Point Roberts, WA Hartley & Marks.

British Standards Institution (2005). BS 7000:6:2005: Design management systems: Part 6: Managing inclusive design – guide. London, England: BSI. https://knowledge.bsigroup.com/products/design-management-systems-managing-inclusive-design-guide/standard

Brumberger, E. R. (2003). The rhetoric of typography: The awareness and impact of typeface appropriateness. Technical Communication, 50(2), 224–231. https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/stc/tc/2003/00000050/00000002/art00007

Buchner, E. F. (1909). Review of The Psychology and Pedagogy of Reading, with a Review of the History of Reading and Writing and of Methods, Texts, and Hygiene in Reading. Psychological Bulletin, 6, 147–150. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0066540

Cattell, J. M. (1886). The time taken up by cerebral operations. Mind, 11(43), 377–392. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2247078

Chaparro, B. S., Shaikh, A. D., & Baker, J. R. (2005). Reading online text with a poor layout: Is performance worse? Usability News. https://researchinuserexperience.wordpress.com/2005/02/13/reading-online-text-with-a-poor-layout-is-performance-worse/

Chapman-Cook speed of reading test. 1923, 1924: Grades 4–8. Educational Test Bureau, Chapman, J. C.

Chung, S. T. L. (2002). The effect of letter spacing on reading speed in central and peripheral vision. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, 43(4), 1270–1276. https://iovs.arvojournals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2200181

Chung, S. T. L. (2004). Reading speed benefits from increased vertical word spacing in normal peripheral vision. Optometry and Vision Science, 81(7), 525–535. https://journals.lww.com/optvissci/Abstract/2004/07000/Reading_Speed_Benefits_from_Increased_Vertical.14.aspx

de Bruijn, D., de Mul, S., & van Oostendorp, H. (1992). The influence of screen size and text layout on the study of text. Behaviour & Information Technology, 11(2), 71–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449299208924322

Diemand-Yauman, C., Oppenheimer, D. M., & Vaughan, E. B. (2011). Fortune favors the bold (and the italicized): Effects of disfluency on educational outcomes. Cognition, 118(1), 111–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.09.012

Dillon, A. (1992). Reading from paper versus screens: A critical review of the empirical literature. Ergonomics, 35(10), 1297–1326. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139208967394

Dillon, A. (2004). Designing usable electronic text (2nd ed.). Boca Raton: CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780367801151

Dillon, A., Kleinman, L., Bias, R., Choi, G. O., & Turnbull, D. (2004). Reading and searching digital documents: An experimental analysis of the effects of image quality on user performance and perceived effort. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 41(1), 267–273. https://doi.org/10.1002/meet.1450410131

Dobres, J., Chahine, N., Reimer, B., Gould, D., Mehler, B., & Coughlin, J. F. (2016). Utilizing psychophysical techniques to investigate the effects of age, typeface design, size, and display polarity on glance legibility. Ergonomics, 59(10), 1377–1391. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2015.1137637

Dowding, G. (1966). Finer points in the spacing and arrangement of type. London: Wace.

Doyle, J. R., & Bottomley, P. A. (2004). Font appropriateness and brand choice. Journal of Business Research, 57(8), 873–880. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1016/S0148-2963(02)00487-3

Doyle, J. R., & Bottomley, P. A. (2006). Dressed for the occasion: Font-product congruity in the perception of logotype. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(2), 112–123. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp1602_2

Dyson, M. C. (2004). How physical text layout affects reading from screen. Behaviour & Information Technology, 23(6), 377–393. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290410001715714

Dyson, M. C. (2005). How do we read text on screen? In H. v. Oostendorp, L. Breure & A. Dillon (Eds.), Creation, use, and deployment of digital information (pp. 279–306). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://www.routledge.com/Creation-Use-and-Deployment-of-Digital-Information/Oostendorp-Breure-Dillon/p/book/9780805845877

Dyson, M. C., & Beier, S. (2016). Investigating typographic differentiation: Italics are more subtle than bold for emphasis. Information Design Journal, 22(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.22.1.02dys

Dyson, M. C., & Kipping, G. J. (1997). The legibility of screen formats: Are three columns better than one? Computers & Graphics, 21(6), 703–712. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0097-8493(97)00048-4

Eitel, A., Kühl, T., Scheiter, K., & Gerjets, P. (2014). Disfluency meets cognitive load in multimedia learning: Does harder-to-read mean better-to-understand? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28(4), 488–501. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3004

Fiset, D., Blais, C., Arguin, M., Tadros, K., Éthier-Majcher, C., Bub, D., et al. (2009). The spatio-temporal dynamics of visual letter recognition. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 26(1), 23–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643290802421160

Fiset, D., Blais, C., Éthier-Majcher, C., Arguin, M., Bub, D., & Gosselin, F. (2008). Features for identification of uppercase and lowercase letters. Psychological Science, 19(11), 1161–1168. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02218.x

Foster, J. J. (1970). A study of the legibility of one- and two-column layouts for bps publications. Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 23, 113–114. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313142619_A_study_of_the_legibility_of_one_and_two_column_layouts_for_BPS_publications

Foster, J. J. (1980). Legibility research 1972–1978: A summary. London: Graphic Information Research Unit, Royal College of Art.

Fox, D., Chaparro, B. S., & Merkle, E. (2007). Examining legibility of the letter “e” and number “0” using classification tree analysis. Usability News, 9(2). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254847470_Examining_Legibility_of_the_Letter_e_and_Number_0_Using_Classification_Tree_Analysis

Frutiger, A. (1998). Signs and symbols: Their design and meaning. London: Ebury Press.

Gill, E. (1931). An essay on typography. London: Dent.

Grabinger, R. S. (1993). Computer screen designs: Viewer judgements. Educational Technology and Research Development, 41(2), 35–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02297311

Grainger, J. (2016). Orthographic processing and reading. Visible Language, 50(2), 132–153. https://journals.uc.edu/index.php/vl/article/view/5925

Grainger, J., & Whitney, C. (2004). Does the huamn mnid raed wrods as a wlohe? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(2), 58–59. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1016/j.tics.2003.11.006

Grainger, J., Dufau, S., & Ziegler, J. C. (2016). A vision of reading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(3), 171–179. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1016/j.tics.2015.12.008

Grainger, J., Lété, B., Bertand, D., Dufau, S., & Ziegler, J. C. (2012). Evidence for multiple routes in learning to read. Cognition, 123(2), 280–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.01.003

Grainger, J., Rey, A., & Dufau, S. (2008). Letter perception: From pixels to pandemonium. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(10), 381–387. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1016/j.tics.2008.06.006

Gregory, M., & Poulton, E. C. (1970). Even versus uneven right-hand margins and the rate of comprehension in reading. Ergonomics, 13(4), 427–434. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140137008931157

Haber, R. N., & Schindler, R. M. (1981). Error in proofreading – evidence of syntactic control of letter processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7(3), 573–579. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0096-1523.7.3.573

Harris, J. (1973). Confusions in letter recognition. Printing Technology, 17(2), 29–34.

Hartley, J., & Trueman, M. (1983). The effects of headings in text on recall, search and retrieval. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 53(JUN), 205–214. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1983.tb02551.x

Hartley, J., Burnhill, P., & Davis, L. (1978). The effects of line length and paragraph denotation on the retrieval of information from prose text. Visible Language, 12(2), 183–194. https://journals.uc.edu/index.php/vl/article/view/5255

Hartley, J., Burnhill, P., & Fraser, S. (1974). Typographical problems of journal design. Applied Ergonomics, 5(1), 15–20. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1016/0003-6870(74)90253-1

Hazlett, R. L., Larson, K., Shaikh, A. D., & Chaparro, B. S. (2013). Two studies on how a typeface congruent with content can enhance onscreen communication. Information Design Journal, 20(3), 207–219. https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.20.3.02haz

Huey, E. B. (1908/1968). The psychology and pedagogy of reading. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1908-10406-000

Hughes, L., & Wilkins, A. (2000). Typography in children’s reading schemes may be suboptimal: Evidence from measures of reading rate. Journal of Research in Reading, 23(3), 314–324. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.00126

Hyönä, J., & Lorch, R. F. (2004). Effects of topic headings on text processing: Evidence from adult readers’ eye fixation patterns. Learning and Instruction 14(2), 131–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.01.001

Jäkel, F., Singh, M., Wichmann, F. A., & Herzog, M. H. (2016). An overview of quantitative approaches in Gestalt perception. Vision Research, 126, 3–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2016.06.004

Joo, S. J., White, A. L., Strodtman, D. J., & Yeatman, J. D. (2018). Optimizing text for an individual’s visual system: The contribution of visual crowding to reading difficulties. Cortex, 103, 291–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2018.03.013

Juni, S., & Gross, J. S. (2008). Emotional and persuasive perception of fonts. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 106(1), 35–42. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.106.1.35-42

Keage, H. A. D., Coussens, S., Kohler, M., Thiessen, M., & Churches, O. F. (2014). Investigating letter recognition in the brain by varying typeface: An event-related potential study. Brain and Cognition, 88, 83–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2014.05.001

Kelly, G. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. New York: Norton. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1956-04524-000

Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85(5), 363–394. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0033-295X.85.5.363

Koffka, K. (1935). Principles of Gestalt psychology. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1935-03991-000

Köhler, W. (1947). Gestalt psychology: An introduction to new concepts in modern psychology. New York: Liveright Publishing Corporation. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1947-03787-000

Kolers, P. A., Duchnicky, R. L., & Ferguson, D. C. (1981). Eye movement measurement of readability of CRT displays. Human Factors, 23(5), 517–527. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872088102300502

Köpper, M., Mayr, S., & Buchner, A. (2016). Reading from computer screen versus reading from paper: Does it still make a difference? Ergonomics, 59(5), 615–632. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2015.1100757

Lanthier, S. N., Risko, E. R., Stolzh, J. A., & Besner, D. (2009). Not all visual features are created equal: Early processing in letter and word recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(1), 67–73. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.3758/PBR.16.1.67

Larson, K. (2004). The science of word recognition. http://www.microsoft.com/typography/ctfonts/WordRecognition.aspx

Larson, K., & Carter, M. (2016). Sitka: A collaboration between type design and science. In M. C. Dyson & C. Y. Suen (Eds.), Digital fonts and reading (pp. 37–53). New Jersey: World Scientific. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/9789814759540_0003

Larson, K., Hazlett, R. L., Chaparro, B. S., & Picard, R. W. (2006). Measuring the aesthetics of reading. In People and computers XX: Proceedings of HCI 2006, (Vol. 1, pp. 41–56): British Computer Society. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-84628-664-3_4

Legge, G. E. (2007). Psychophysics of reading in normal and low vision. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2006-20917-000

Legge, G. E., & Bigelow, C. A. (2011). Does print size matter for reading? A review of findings from vision science and typography. Journal of Vision, 11(5):8, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1167/11.5.8

Legros, L. A., & Grant, J. C. (1916). Typographical printing-surfaces: The technology and mechanism of their production. London: Longmans, Green.

Lehmann, J., Goussios, C., & Seufert, T. (2016). Working memory capacity and disfluency effect: An aptitude-treatment-interaction study. Metacognition and Learning, 11(1), 89–105. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1007/s11409-015-9149-z

Lewis, C., & Walker, P. (1989). Typographic influences on reading. British Journal of Psychology, 80(2), 241–257. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1989.tb02317.x

Licko, Z. (1990). Do you read me? Emigre, 15, 8–13. https://www.emigre.com/Essays/ZuzanaLicko/Emigre15

Ling, J., & van Schaik, P. (2006). The influence of font type and line length on visual search and information retrieval in web pages. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64(5), 395–404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.08.015

Ling, J., & van Schaik, P. (2007). The influence of line spacing and text alignment on visual search of web pages. Displays, 28, 60–67. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1016/j.displa.2007.04.003

Lonsdale, M. (2007). Does typographic design of examination materials affect performance? Information Design Journal, 15(2), 114–138. https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.15.2.04lon

Lonsdale, M., Dyson, M. C., & Reynolds, L. (2006). Reading in examination-type situations: The effects of text layout on performance. Journal of Research in Reading, 29(4), 433–453. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2006.00317.x

Lund, O. (1999). Knowledge construction in typography: The case of legibility research and the legibility of sans serif typefaces. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Reading, UK. https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.301973

Macaya, M., & Perea, M. (2014). Does bold emphasis facilitate the process of visual-word recognition? Spanish Journal of Psychology, 17(e2), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1017/sjp.2014.2

MacDonald-Ross, M., & Waller, R. (1975). Criticism, alternatives and tests: A conceptual framework for improving typography. Programmed Learning and Educational Technology, 12(2), 75–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/1355800750120202

Martelli, M., Majaj, N. J., & Pelli, D. G. (2005). Are faces processed like words? A diagnostic test for recognition by parts. Journal of Vision, 5(1), 58–70. https://doi.org/10.1167/5.1.6

McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception; part 1. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88(5), 375–407. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.88.5.375

Monk, A. F., & Hulme, C. (1983). Errors in proofreading: Evidence for the use of word shape in word recognition. Memory & Cognition, 11(1), 16-23. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03197657

Moret-Tatay, C., & Perea, M. (2011). Do serifs provide an advantage in the recognition of written words? Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 23(5), 619–624. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2011.546781

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. SID Symposium Digest of Technical Papers, 33(1), 244–247. http://dx.doi.org/10.1889/1.1830242

Moys, J. L. (2014a). Investigating readers’ impressions of typographic differentiation using repertory grids. Visible Language, 47(3), 96–123. https://journals.uc.edu/index.php/vl/article/view/5876

Moys, J. L. (2014b). Typographic layout and first impressions – testing how changes in text layout influence readers’ judgments of documents. Visible Language, 48(1), 41–67. https://journals.uc.edu/index.php/vl/article/view/5879

Moys, J. L., Loveland, P., & Dyson, M. C. (2018). Eink versus paper: Exploring the effects of medium and typographic quality on recall and reading speed. Visible Language, 52(3), 74–95. https://journals.uc.edu/index.php/vl/article/view/4634

Muter, P., & Maurutto, P. (1991). Reading and skimming from computer screens and books: The paperless office revisited? Behaviour & Information Technology, 10(4), 257–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449299108924288

Nelson-Denny reading test. (1981). Chicago, Illinois: The Riverside Publishing Company.

New, B., & Grainger, J. (2011). On letter frequency effects. Acta Psychologica, 138(2), 322–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.07.001

Ovink, G. W. (1938). Legibility, atmosphere-value and forms of printing type. Leiden: Sijthoff.

Paap, K. R., Newsome, S. L., & Noel, R. W. (1984). Word shape’s in poor shape for the race to the lexicon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10(3), 413–428. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0096-1523.10.3.413

Paterson, D. G., & Tinker, M. A. (1932). Studies of typographical factors influencing speed of reading: X. Style of type face. Journal of Applied Psychology, 16(6), 605–613. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/h0070644

Paterson, D. G., & Tinker, M. A. (1940). How to make type readable. New York: Harper and Row.

Pelli, D. G., & Tillman, K. A. (2007). Parts, wholes, and context in reading: A triple dissociation. Plos One, 2(8), e680. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000680

Pelli, D. G., Burns, C. W., Farell, B., & Moore-Page, D. C. (2006). Feature detection and letter identification. Vision Research 46(28), 4646–4674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2006.04.023

Perea, M. (2012). Revisiting Huey: On the importance of the upper part of words during reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(6), 1148–1153. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0304-0

Perea, M. (2013). Why does the APA recommend the use of serif fonts? Psicothema, 25(1), 13–17. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2012.1419

Perea, M., & Gómez, P. (2012a). Increasing interletter spacing facilitates encoding of words. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(2), 332–338. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.3758/s13423-011-0214-6

Perea, M., & Gómez, P. (2012b). Subtle increases in interletter spacing facilitate the encoding of words during normal reading. Plos One, 7(10), e47568. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0047568

Perea, M., Giner, L., Marcet, A., & Gómez, P. (2016). Does extra interletter spacing help text reading in skilled adult readers? Spanish Journal of Psychology, 19, e26. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2016-25768-001

Perea, M., Moret-Tatay, C., & Gómez, P. (2011). The effects of interletter spacing in visual-word recognition. Acta Psychologica, 137(3), 345–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.04.003

Perea, M., Panadero, V., Moret-Tatay, C., & Gómez, P. (2012). The effects of inter-letter spacing in visual-word recognition: Evidence with young normal readers and developmental dyslexics. Learning and Instruction, 22(6), 420–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.04.001

Perea, M., Rosa, E., & Marcet, A. (2017). Where is the locus of the lowercase advantage during sentence reading? Acta Psychologica, 177, 30–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2017.04.007

Petit, J. P., & Grainger, J. (2002). Masked partial priming of letter perception. Visual Cognition, 9(3), 337–353. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506280042000207

Pollatsek, A., Raney, G. E., Lagasse, L., & Rayner, K. (1993). The use of information below fixation in reading and in visual-search. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology–Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Experimentale, 47(2), 179–200. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/h0078824

Poulton, E. C. (1959). Effects of printing types and formats on the comprehension of scientific journals. Nature, 184, 1824–1825. https://doi.org/10.1038/1841824a0

Poulton, E. C. (1965). Letter differentiation and rate of comprehension in reading. Journal of Applied Psychology, 49(5), 358–362. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0022461

Poulton, E. C. (1967). Searching for newspapers headlines printed in capitals or lower-case letters. Journal of Applied Psychology, 51(5), 417–425. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/h0025098

Poynor, R. (1999). The great type debate rages on. Graphis, 319, 14,16. https://www.graphis.com/store_/product/issue-319/

Pyke, R. L. (1926). Report on the legibility of print: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.

Rayner, K. (1986). Eye-movements and the perceptual span in beginning and skilled readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 41(2), 211–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(86)90037-8

Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (1989). The psychology of reading. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1989-97284-000

Rayner, K., White, S. J., Johnson, R. L., & Liversedge, S. P. (2006). Raeding wrods with jubmled lettres – there is a cost. Psychological Science, 17(3), 192–193. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01684.x

Rehe, R. F. (1979). Typography: How to make it most legible. Carmel, Indiana: Design Research Publications.

Reimer, B., Mehler, B., Dobres, J., Coughlin, J. F., Matteson, S., Gould, D., et al. (2014). Assessing the impact of typeface design in a text-rich automotive user interface. Ergonomics, 57(11), 1643–1658. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2014.940000

Rey, A., Dufau, S., Massol, S., & Grainger, J. (2009). Testing computational models of letter perception with item-level event-related potentials. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 26(1), 7–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440802176300

Reynolds, L. (1984). The legibility of printed scientific and technical information. In R. Easterby & H. Zwaga (Eds.), Information design: The design and evaluation of signs and printed material (pp. 187–208). Chichester: John Wiley.

Reynolds, L., & Simmonds, D. (1984). The legibility of type. In Presentation of data in science (pp. 1–19): Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-8354-0_1

Reynolds, L., & Walker, S. (2004). ‘You can’t see what the words say’: word spacing and letter spacing in children’s reading books. Journal of Research in Reading,27(1), 87–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2004.00216.x

Roethlein, B. E. C. (1912). The relative legibility of different faces of printing types. The American Journal of Psychology, 23(1), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.2307/1413112

Rosa, E., Perea, M., & Enneson, P. (2016). The role of letter features in visual-word recognition: Evidence from a delayed segment technique. Acta Psychologica, 169, 133–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2016.05.016

Rudgard-Redsell, P. (2014). The perceived versus actual usability of mobile navigation designs. Unpublished BA dissertation, University of Reading, UK.

Rumelhart, D. E., & Siple, P. (1974). Process of recognizing tachistoscopically presented words. Psychological Review, 81(2), 99–118. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/h0036117

Rummer, R., Schweppe, J., & Schwede, A. (2016). Fortune is fickle: Null-effects of disfluency on learning outcomes. Metacognition and Learning, 11(1), 57–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-015-9151-5

Sanford, E. C. C. (1888). The relative legibility of the small letters. The American Journal of Psychology, 1(3), 402–435. https://doi.org/10.2307/1411012

Sanocki, T. (1987). Visual knowledge underlying letter perception: Font-specific schematic tuning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13(2), 267–278. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0096-1523.13.2.267

Sanocki, T. (1988). Font regularity constraints on the process of letter recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14(3), 472–480. https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-1523.14.3.472

Shaikh, A. D., & Chaparro, B. (2016). Perception of fonts: Perceived personality traits and appropriate uses. In M. C. Dyson & C. Y. Suen (Eds.), Digital fonts and reading (pp. 226–247). New Jersey: World Scientific. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814759540_0013

Shaikh, A. D., & Fox, D. (2008). Does the typeface of a resume impact our perception of the applicant. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Does-the-Typeface-of-a-Resume-Impact-Our-Perception-Shaikh-Fox/b2b96fd092271f1aeb4001f5db09f2b746f6adfa

Sheedy, J. E., Subbaram, M., Zimmerman, A., & Hayes, J. R. (2005). Text legibility and the letter superiority effect. Human Factors, 47(4), 797–815. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872005775570998

Sheedy, J., Tai, Y.-C., Subbaram, M., Gowrisankaran, S., & Hayes, J. (2008). ClearType sub-pixel text rendering: Preference, legibility and reading performance. Displays, 29(2), 138–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.displa.2007.09.016

Sidi, Y., Ophir, Y., & Ackerman, R. (2016). Generalizing screen inferiority – does the medium, screen versus paper, affect performance even with brief tasks? Metacognition and Learning, 11(1), 15–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-015-9150-6

Siegenthaler, E., Wurtz, P., Bergamin, P., & Groner, R. (2011). Comparing reading processes on e-ink displays and print. Displays, 32(5), 268–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.displa.2011.05.005

Slattery, T. J., & Rayner, K. (2010). The influence of text legibility on eye movements during reading. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24(8), 1129–1148. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1623

Slattery, T. J., & Rayner, K. (2013). Effects of intraword and interword spacing on eye movements during reading: Exploring the optimal use of space in a line of text. Attention Perception & Psychophysics, 75, 1275–1292.https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-013-0463-8

Slattery, T. J., Yates, M., & Angele, B. (2016). Interword and interletter spacing effects during reading revisited: Interactions with word and font characteristics. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 22(4), 406–422. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/xap0000104

Sloan, L. (1959). New test charts for the measurement of visual acuity at far and near distances. American Journal of Opthamology, 48(6), 807–813. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9394(59)90626-9

Song, H., & Schwarz, N. (2008). If it’s hard to read, it’s hard to do: Processing fluency affects effort prediction and motivation. Psychological Science, 19(10), 986–988. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02189.x

Song, H., & Schwarz, N. (2010). If it’s easy to read, it’s easy to do, pretty, good, and true. The Psychologist, 23(2), 108–111. https://www.bps.org.uk/psychologist/if-its-easy-read-its-easy-do-pretty-good-and-true

Spencer, H. (1968). The visible word. London: Royal College of Art.

Spencer, H. (1970). The future role of the printed word. In Typographic opportunities in the computer age: Papers of the 11th congress of the Association Typographique Internationale Prague, June 1969 (pp. 71–75). Prague: Typografia Prague.

Stroop, J. R. (1935/1992). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions (reprinted from Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol 18, pp. 643–662, 1935). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121(1), 15–23. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0096-3445.121.1.15

Strukelj, A., Scheiter, K., Nystrom, M., & Holmqvist, K. (2016). Exploring the lack of a disfluency effect: Evidence from eye movements. Metacognition and Learning, 11(1), 71–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-015-9146-2

Tannenbaum, P. H., Jacobson, H. K., & Norris, E. L. (1964). An experimental investigation of typeface connotations. Journalism Quarterly, 41(1), 65–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769906404100108

Tejero, P., Perea, M., & Jimenéz, M. (2014). Is there a genuine advantage to the upper part of words during lexical access? Evidence from the Stroop task. Memory & Cognition, 42(5), 834–841. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-013-0390-x

Thiessen, M., Kohler, M., Churches, O., Coussens, S., & Keage, H. (2015). Brainy type: A look at how the brain processes typographic information. Visible Language, 49(1–2), 175–188. https://journals.uc.edu/index.php/vl/article/view/5903

Thompson, J. (2009). The relationship between perceived and actual legibility. Unpublished BA dissertation, University of Reading, UK.

Tinker, M. A. (1928). The relative legibility of the letters, the digits, and of certain mathematical signs. Journal of General Psychology, 1, 472–496. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.1928.9918022

Tinker, M. A. (1947). The Tinker speed of reading test. Minneapolis, MN: The University of Minnesota Press.

Tinker, M. A. (1963). Legibility of print. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press.

Tinker, M. A. (1965). Bases for effective reading. Minneapolis: Lund Press.

Tracy, W. (1982). Other replies to Donald E. Knuth’s article. “The concept of a meta-font”. Visible Language, 16(4), 353–355. https://journals.uc.edu/index.php/vl/issue/view/360

Tracy, W. (1986). Letters of credit: A view of type design. London: Gordon Fraser.

Twyman, M. L. (1981). Typography without words. Visible Language, 15(1), 5–12. https://journals.uc.edu/index.php/vl/article/view/5310

Wade, N. J., Tatler, B. W., & Heller, D. (2003). Dodge-ing the issue: Dodge, Javal, Hering, and the measurement of saccades in eye-movement research. Perception, 32(7), 793–804. https://doi.org/10.1068/p3470

Walker, S., & Reynolds, L. (2003). Serifs, sans serifs and infant characters in children’s reading books. Information Design Journal, 11(3), 106–122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/idj.11.2.04wal

Warde, B. (1930/2009). The crystal goblet or why printing should be invisible. In H. Armstrong (Ed.), Graphic design theory: readings from the field (pp. 39–43). New York, US: Princeton Architectural Press.

Wendt, D. (1970). By what criteria are we to judge legibility? In Typographic opportunities in the computer age: Papers of the 11th congress of the Association Typographique Internationale Prague, June 1969 (pp. 42–46). Prague: Typografia Prague.

Wertheimer, M. (1923). Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt, II. Psychologische Forschung, 4, 301–350. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00410640

Wheildon, C. (1986). Communicating or just making pretty shapes. Sydney, Australia: Newspaper Advertising Bureau of Australia Limited.

Wheildon, C. (1995). Type & layout. Berkeley, California: Strathmoor Press.

Williams, T. R., & Spyridakis, J. H. (1992). Visual discriminability of headings in text. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 35(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119134633.ch18

Williamson, H. (1983). Methods of book design: The practice of an industrial craft (3rd ed.). London: Yale University Press.

Wrolstad, M. E. (1969). Letterform research needs definition and direction: a report from the Editor. Journal of Typographic Research, 3(2), 115–126. https://journals.uc.edu/index.php/vl/article/view/5043/3907

Wrolstad, M. E. (1970). Methods of research into legibility and intelligibility. In Typographic opportunities in the computer age: Papers of the 11th congress of the Association Typographique Internationale Prague, June 1969 (pp. 36–41). Prague: Typografia Prague.

Youngman, M., & Scharff, L. (1998). Text width and margin width influences. Paper presented at the Southwestern Psychological Association Conference 1998. http://www.lieb.com/Readings/Width.pdf

Yu, D., Cheung, S.-H., Legge, G. E., & Chung, S. T. L. (2007). Effect of letter spacing on visual span and reading speed. Journal of Vision, 7(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1167/7.2.2

Zachrisson, B. (1965). Studies in the legibility of printed text. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.

Zachrisson, B. (1970). The problem of congeniality in typography. In Typographic opportunities in the computer age: Papers of the 11th congress of the Association Typographique Internationale Prague, June 1969 (pp. 47–51). Prague: Typografia Prague.