The influence of screen size and text layout on the study of text

Bruijn, David de; Mul, Sjaak De; Oostendorp, Herre van

doi:10.1080/01449299208924322

Cited by 50 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Lang, Newhagen, and Reeves (1996) posit that a structural feature that occurs in one medium will divert processing capacity from the elaboration necessary for subsequent recall; thus, the structural, task, or contextual factors of a screen might alter the allocation of processing capacity. Hansen and Haas (1988) proposed a variety of factors (page size, legibility, responsiveness, and "sense of text") that may account for diminished user performance on memory for information read from a computer screen, but De Bruijn et al (1992) were able to show that better computer display (larger and/or better organized) continues to show differences in reading time but no difference in recognition for the material, implying that elaboration could be responsible for differences in recall memory. …”

mentioning

confidence: 95%

Memory for advertising and information content: Comparing the printed page to the computer screen

Jones¹,

Pentecost²,

Requena³

2005

Psychology and Marketing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An experiment was used to test memory for two forms of information-ad copy (persuasive) and consumer information (nonpersuasive) presented in print and screen media. For both forms of information, print outperforms screen on recall but not on recognition. The results suggest that print information is easier to retrieve but also that screen information is available in memory. Differences between print and screen media are persistent and not readily explained by any of the obvious individual factors-comfort/familiarity, preference, and reading time. Other results with implications for marketing communication decisions show that brand name is poorly recalled from the screen relative to the printed page and that the nonpersuasive consumer information is better remembered than is persuasive ad information. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.With the rise in the use of the Internet as a communication medium, one wonders how the Internet compares to other marketing media with respect Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 22(8) to traditional measures of communication effectiveness, such as memory, attitude, intention to buy, and purchase. Various studies over the years have demonstrated that consumer responses to persuasive communication differ across media and depend on surrounding context (Aaker & Brown, 1972;Belch, Belch, & Villarreal, 1987;Soldow & Principe, 1981). Researchers (Pavlou & Stewart, 2000;Rodgers & Thorson, 2000) have argued that electronic media possess physical and consumer processing characteristics that warrant new frameworks to account for those factors. Two such frameworks for research on online advertising emphasize three key factors-consumer-driven interactivity Rodgers & Thorson, 2000), consumer control Rodgers & Thorson, 2000), and consumers' intentions (Rodgers & Thorson, 2000)-that make on-line learning different from off-line. Similarly, Hoffman and Novak (1996) posited that hypermedia possess special characteristics, such as machine and person interactivity, temporal synchronicity, breadth of communication, feedback symmetry, and linked sources, that may make on-line communication different from off-line. Despite the unique consumer factors and hypermedia factors, traditional measures of advertising effectiveness, including memory for information (Hoffman & Novak, 1996;Rodgers & Thorson, 2000), retain importance in this new medium.Differences between on-line and off-line media effects constitute a growing issue for the effectiveness of marketing communications. Increasingly, companies rely on the Internet to deliver persuasive content (e.g., banner ads, pop-up ads) as well as to provide nonpersuasive information to consumers (Dreze & Zufryden, 1998). British Airways, for instance, provides information for healthy travel as well as updated arrival and departure times. The benefits of broad, fast access to target audiences are great, but few studies have investigated differences for identical content and layout disseminated in a paper versus an on-line form. Newspapers, for example, are finding suc...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 95%

Memory for advertising and information content: Comparing the printed page to the computer screen

Jones¹,

Pentecost²,

Requena³

2005

Psychology and Marketing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In our analyses, we will use the average RTs both for reading and selecting links which reflects the intensity of the cognitive load carried out during the task. However, some authors have claimed that not only the intensity but also the duration of the CL is relevant [33,34].…”

Section: Rts To Secondary Taskmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Reading Strategies and Prior Knowledge on Cognitive Load and Learning with Hypertext

Madrid¹,

Cañas²

2009

TOERGJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reading strategies, prior knowledge and cognitive load are some variables that have been related with comprehension and learning with hypertext systems. In this study we analyze the effect of two different hypertext reading strategies -coherence and interest -and two prior knowledge levels -low and high -on cognitive load, and their relation with learning. For low prior knowledge readers, data reveal that following a coherence strategy leads to lower cognitive load during reading and better learning. For high prior knowledge readers, following an interest strategy produce higher cognitive load during reading than a coherence strategy, but they learned equally from both strategies. These results are discussed taking into account the implication of two different components of cognitive load (extraneous and germane cognitive load).

show abstract

“…The participants took part in 20 experimental conditions at a time (5 typefaces Â 4 positions), first reading the words in lower-, then in upper-case letters, or vice versa. As four positions can be used to present titles on the television screen (bottom left and right or top left and right), we presented words in the four randomly alternating corners of the screen (De Bruijn et al, 1992;Hartley, 1999). Fig.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Typeface comparison − Does the x-height of lower-case letters increased to the size of upper-case letters speed up recognition?

Pušnik

Podlešek

Možina

2016

International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The influence of screen size and text layout on the study of text

Cited by 50 publications

References 9 publications

Memory for advertising and information content: Comparing the printed page to the computer screen

Memory for advertising and information content: Comparing the printed page to the computer screen

The Effect of Reading Strategies and Prior Knowledge on Cognitive Load and Learning with Hypertext

Typeface comparison − Does the x-height of lower-case letters increased to the size of upper-case letters speed up recognition?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About