![monotype corsiva bold monotype corsiva bold](https://blogfonts.com/fonts/m/820/134820/img/1-charmap-monotype-corsiva.png)
![monotype corsiva bold monotype corsiva bold](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/ab/52/3f/ab523f14a9b100cd4ec772b099aa5bef.png)
I’ve recreated one of the experiment 1 texts in all the typefaces tested in both experiments (I’ve sloped the Comic Sans by 12 degrees).ĭifferent (from Arial) the variant fonts may be, but I would contend that they are not ‘ugly’. But there’s a special problem with Haettenschweiler, which we’ll come to.įor experiment 1, we know that simple, comparable texts were set in 16pt Arial, 16pt Comic Sans Italicized (60% greyscale), and 16pt Bodoni MT (60% greyscale). So while a longish text in Word might be really difficult, a short bullet-pointed list, or a straightforward PowerPoint slide might not be so problematic. At first sight Haettenschweiler is – at least it has normal letterforms emboldened and condensed to a very abnormal degree for a text face – but on reflection it’s a fairly conventional font for newspaper headlines. Monotype Corsiva might appear ‘arty’ to some but again it isn’t really a leftfield font. Comic Sans may be the butt of jokes and typographic snobbery, but its letterforms are clearly within the norms of the western type canon. With the exception of Haettenschweiler, all these fonts are near normal in weight and proportion. For an investigation in the effect of visual presentation of text, this is a pretty big omission. It isn’t clear from the paper whether the italic or roman version of Bodoni MT was used – one of the problems is that we are only shown two example stimuli from the first experiment, and none from the second experiment. The first experiment compared Arial with Comic Sans Italicized and Bodoni MT. Shaw, despite the Shavian insistence that his works be set exclusively in that typeface.įirst, let’s look at the typefaces that the investigators considered disfluent: Comic Sans, Comic Sans Italicized, Bodoni MT, Monotype Corsiva, Haettenschweiler (similar to Compacta Bold). Setting your text in Caslon won’t make you write like G. As someone who thinks that good typography consists of good writing that is well articulated, well set, and properly printed (or presented onscreen), I find the concentration on the ‘magic bullet’ effect of a typeface change worrying. Its findings have been reduced to ‘ugly fonts help you learn’, ‘typographic history is wrong’, even ‘Kindles are bad for you’, but I’m sure these leaps are not justified by the paper itself. This paper reports two linked studies investigating the claim that a degree of disfluency in documents (put simply, making them harder to read) leads to improved memory performance.
![monotype corsiva bold monotype corsiva bold](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-iiNi9H3Iwtc/VGFQd63QeSI/AAAAAAAABdc/5t_MKYDp5ak/s1600/monotypecorsivaboldfreefontdownload.jpg)
The paper by Diemand-Yauman, Oppenheimer, and Vaughan, ‘Fortune favors the bold (and the italicized)’, made it to the Today programme on Friday, courtesy of Jonah Lehrer of Wired.