It is interesting that the choice of the left image tends to come from people judging "from the gut" and who claim no design expertise, while the case for the r

It is interesting that the choice of the left image tends to come from people judging "from the gut" and who claim no design expertise, while the case for the right image is mostly argued from first design principles, focusing on structure as a way to minimize the mental cost of reading. It's possible that the easiest-to-read poster is not necessarily the most effective. Some studies have shown that harder to read text correlates with better retention [1]. Also, there are traffic studies suggesting that narrower streets [2] and traffic intersections with no signaling [3] may be safer. The latter examples might seem unrelated to the discussion, but what all these cases have in common is that more attention, rather than less, is being demanded from the user. It does not seem surprising that an increased level of attention improves outcomes. I'd be curious to see the results of a rigorous A/B test with the two posters from the article. [1] http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S28/82/93O80/ http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S28/82/93O80/ [2] http://www.citylab.com/design/2014/10/why-12-foot-traffic-lanes-are-disastrous-for-safety-and-must-be-replaced-now/381117/ http://www.citylab.com/design/2014/10/why-12-foot-traffic-la... [3] http://www.citylab.com/commute/2011/09/shared-spaces/116/ http://www.citylab.com/commute/2011/09/shared-spaces/116/