16 ms·
Ahem, my knowledge of cognitive psychology (and psychology in general) are certainly not relevant but I pretend to be a decent reader... Sorry, your font is ter
by xte 8y ago
Ahem, my knowledge of cognitive psychology (and psychology in general) are certainly not relevant but I pretend to be a decent reader... Sorry, your font is terrible to read. I spent more time in deciphering it than in understand the written concept.
BTW personally I always found FAR MORE effective to take notes with pen and paper and after transfer them on personal desktop, in org_mode in my case so without any fancy distracting typography. The same for reading: I learn far more reading a printed docs than from an on-screen one. I test many times and techniques from high school to university to work training/conference etc. ALL "PC made from the start" was a fail, including photos and voice recording. Of course I'm not a statistical valid sample but I pretend to be not much different than any other human around.
- jessep 8y agoI can't tell if you are joking or not. The point of the font is being terrible to read. There's an explanation on the page. Making your brain work harder to get the info makes it more likely to remember the info.
- gowld 8y ago"makes it more likely to remember the info" is a dubious claim, not an established fact.
- xte 8y agoNo it's not a joke, claiming that being harder to read help understanding things remind me the ancient Victorian era, the Cilicium idea, the "all work and no play" song etc. I do not consider it a scientific truth but only another reactionary claim that can be as scientific as Franklin idea of forcibly wake up people with a cannon shoot in any road.
- regularfry 8y agohttp://www.matthewfrench.net/pubs/fontspreprint.pdf http://www.matthewfrench.net/pubs/fontspreprint.pdf (to pick one example) You may not know it, but there are studies backing this up. Whether you consider it a scientific truth or not is barely relevant. What is interesting to know is that not all disfluencies are created equal: blurring text and adding visual noise don't help, apparently because they don't engage the right part of the visual pathway.
- xte 8y agoThanks for the link, yes I do not know these kind of studies before, and I skim read it just now, however I also see claim of non reproducibility and different results from other studies in this page. Personally I notice that force me to read difficult fonts does not help at all my understatement or my memory. In the end my idea, without statistical proof of course, is that such contrasting observation are simply noise. Perhaps due to a sample size not big enough, perhaps due to tested individual itself but still noise. Also IMVHO such studies exist for a reason: teacher's mean quality is getting lower and lower due to various schools reforms and since admit errors it's not a thing these days someone try a sort of "montecarlo test" in the desperate search of a solution to stop the bleeding. Other find such tentative nice for their business because new stuff means new sales for someone.