Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 5 – uploaded by Maria dos Santos Lonsdale

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Exp! - participants were asked to perform as quickly and accurately as possible Exp 2 - participants were asked to perform as accurately as possible but at their normal reading rate 71 - text layout intended to be most legible 72 - text layout intended to be of medium legibility 73 - text layout intended to be least legible

Table 5 Exp! - participants were asked to perform as quickly and accurately as possible Exp 2 - participants were asked to perform as accurately as possible but at their normal reading rate 71 - text layout intended to be most legible 72 - text layout intended to be of medium legibility 73 - text layout intended to be least legible

Related Figures (10)

PEMS THGLeTIG PO VMIRGLeU Ue ta yYVUUts, PaELLEaYS 2, GHIM Ul matching tasks used in the reading module of the IELTS examination. As already pointed out, IELTS aims to reflect real-academic reading materials. (Permission was obtained to use these texts and questions.)
PEMS THGLeTIG PO VMIRGLeU Ue ta yYVUUts, PaELLEaYS 2, GHIM Ul matching tasks used in the reading module of the IELTS examination. As already pointed out, IELTS aims to reflect real-academic reading materials. (Permission was obtained to use these texts and questions.)
77 - text layout intended to be most legible 72 - text layout intended to be of medium legibility 73 - text layout intended to be least legible According to participants’ comments, layout T1 was considered to make it easier to locate the answers mainly because of good line length, adequate interlinear space, and distinction between paragraphs. In general, layout T1 was identified as having the clearest structure, making it easiest to locate information. Concerning attractiveness, participants were in agreement that the generous space of layout T1 made reading relaxing and easy, and the ‘journal look’ of layout T2 was familiar to them. Other comments included the fact that in layout T1 there was enough space to take notes, and the question and answer sheet was very clear.
77 - text layout intended to be most legible 72 - text layout intended to be of medium legibility 73 - text layout intended to be least legible According to participants’ comments, layout T1 was considered to make it easier to locate the answers mainly because of good line length, adequate interlinear space, and distinction between paragraphs. In general, layout T1 was identified as having the clearest structure, making it easiest to locate information. Concerning attractiveness, participants were in agreement that the generous space of layout T1 made reading relaxing and easy, and the ‘journal look’ of layout T2 was familiar to them. Other comments included the fact that in layout T1 there was enough space to take notes, and the question and answer sheet was very clear.
The one-way repeated measures ANOVA showed that task efficiency scores were significantly different among text layouts (F (2,58)=6.59, p<0.01).
The one-way repeated measures ANOVA showed that task efficiency scores were significantly different among text layouts (F (2,58)=6.59, p<0.01).
Note: within the body of the table, the numbers for ‘Ease of use’ and ‘Attractiveness’ refer to the number of participants who ranked the layouts as first, i.e. as the easiest or as the most attractive. * Normal eye-sighted ** Using vision correction (glasses or contact lenses]
Note: within the body of the table, the numbers for ‘Ease of use’ and ‘Attractiveness’ refer to the number of participants who ranked the layouts as first, i.e. as the easiest or as the most attractive. * Normal eye-sighted ** Using vision correction (glasses or contact lenses]
Exp! - participants were asked to perform as quickly and accurately as possible Exp 2 - participants were asked to perform as accurately as possible but at their normal reading rate 71 - text layout intended to be most legible 72 - text layout intended to be of medium legibility 73 - text layout intended to be least legible There are two points of interest to note. First there were significant differences in time across the two experiments. Examination of the means revealed that participants took less time in Experiment 1 (where
Exp! - participants were asked to perform as quickly and accurately as possible Exp 2 - participants were asked to perform as accurately as possible but at their normal reading rate 71 - text layout intended to be most legible 72 - text layout intended to be of medium legibility 73 - text layout intended to be least legible There are two points of interest to note. First there were significant differences in time across the two experiments. Examination of the means revealed that participants took less time in Experiment 1 (where
In addition, according to the similar comments made by participants in the two experiments, layout T1 made it easiest to locate the answers and was attractive mainly because of good line length, generous interlinear space and the clear separation of paragraphs. This evidence suggests that the effect of text layout on performance may have been caused by these particular typographic features: line length, interlinear space, and paragraph distinction. Further and systematic investigation would be required to confirm this.
In addition, according to the similar comments made by participants in the two experiments, layout T1 made it easiest to locate the answers and was attractive mainly because of good line length, generous interlinear space and the clear separation of paragraphs. This evidence suggests that the effect of text layout on performance may have been caused by these particular typographic features: line length, interlinear space, and paragraph distinction. Further and systematic investigation would be required to confirm this.
TASK EFFICIENCY Exp! - participants were asked to perform as quickly and accurately as possible Exp 2 - participants were asked to perform as accurately as possible but at their normal reading rate [1 - text layout intended to be most legible [2 - text layout intended to be of medium legibility [3 - text layout intended to be least legible
TASK EFFICIENCY Exp! - participants were asked to perform as quickly and accurately as possible Exp 2 - participants were asked to perform as accurately as possible but at their normal reading rate [1 - text layout intended to be most legible [2 - text layout intended to be of medium legibility [3 - text layout intended to be least legible
Related topics:
Instructional DesignInformation DesignTypographic Design
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved