Skip to main content Skip to navigation


<?xml version="1.0"?>

<!DOCTYPE TEI.2 SYSTEM "base.dtd">




<title>Screen vs Paper</title></titleStmt>

<publicationStmt><distributor>BASE and Oxford Text Archive</distributor>


<availability><p>The British Academic Spoken English (BASE) corpus was developed at the

Universities of Warwick and Reading, under the directorship of Hilary Nesi

(Centre for English Language Teacher Education, Warwick) and Paul Thompson

(Department of Applied Linguistics, Reading), with funding from BALEAP,

EURALEX, the British Academy and the Arts and Humanities Research Board. The

original recordings are held at the Universities of Warwick and Reading, and

at the Oxford Text Archive and may be consulted by bona fide researchers

upon written application to any of the holding bodies.

The BASE corpus is freely available to researchers who agree to the

following conditions:</p>

<p>1. The recordings and transcriptions should not be modified in any


<p>2. The recordings and transcriptions should be used for research purposes

only; they should not be reproduced in teaching materials</p>

<p>3. The recordings and transcriptions should not be reproduced in full for

a wider audience/readership, although researchers are free to quote short

passages of text (up to 200 running words from any given speech event)</p>

<p>4. The corpus developers should be informed of all presentations or

publications arising from analysis of the corpus</p><p>

Researchers should acknowledge their use of the corpus using the following

form of words:

The recordings and transcriptions used in this study come from the British

Academic Spoken English (BASE) corpus, which was developed at the

Universities of Warwick and Reading under the directorship of Hilary Nesi

(Warwick) and Paul Thompson (Reading). Corpus development was assisted by

funding from the Universities of Warwick and Reading, BALEAP, EURALEX, the

British Academy and the Arts and Humanities Research Board. </p></availability>




<recording dur="00:51:43" n="8027">


<respStmt><name>BASE team</name>



<langUsage><language id="en">English</language>



<person id="nf1263" role="main speaker" n="n" sex="f"><p>nf1263, main speaker, non-student, female</p></person>

<person id="sm1264" role="participant" n="s" sex="m"><p>sm1264, participant, student, male</p></person>

<person id="sf1265" role="participant" n="s" sex="f"><p>sf1265, participant, student, female</p></person>

<person id="sf1266" role="participant" n="s" sex="f"><p>sf1266, participant, student, female</p></person>

<person id="sf1267" role="participant" n="s" sex="f"><p>sf1267, participant, student, female</p></person>

<person id="sm1268" role="participant" n="s" sex="m"><p>sm1268, participant, student, male</p></person>

<person id="sm1269" role="participant" n="s" sex="m"><p>sm1269, participant, student, male</p></person>

<person id="sm1270" role="participant" n="s" sex="m"><p>sm1270, participant, student, male</p></person>

<personGrp id="ss" role="audience" size="s"><p>ss, audience, small group </p></personGrp>

<personGrp id="sl" role="all" size="s"><p>sl, all, small group</p></personGrp>

<personGrp role="speakers" size="10"><p>number of speakers: 10</p></personGrp>





<item n="speechevent">Lecture</item>

<item n="acaddept">Typography</item>

<item n="acaddiv">ss</item>

<item n="partlevel">UG3</item>

<item n="module">Electronic publishing</item>




<u who="nf1263"> okay right <pause dur="0.3"/> so <pause dur="0.6"/> moving on from the last few weeks where i've been <pause dur="0.2"/> talking about other empirical work <pause dur="0.3"/> that <pause dur="0.3"/> relates to either navigation or things like that <pause dur="0.6"/> so in previous weeks i've talked about either usability studies which sort of check out individual products <pause dur="0.7"/> or <pause dur="0.5"/> # evaluations doing analyses that sort of thing <pause dur="0.2"/> and research into different types of navigation <pause dur="0.5"/> and last week presentation this one's going to focus very much on <pause dur="0.2"/> reading from screen <pause dur="0.7"/> okay <pause dur="0.4"/> and the model for the <pause dur="0.4"/> the second half of it <unclear>that's the time</unclear> <pause dur="1.3"/> show you what i mean by the second half <pause dur="0.4"/> the model for this part is definitely legibility studies so <pause dur="0.3"/> if you can recall the sort of things that you might have read about in the first year <pause dur="0.6"/> in terms of # legibility of print then this is the the equivalent in a way <pause dur="0.3"/> although it takes a slightly different form <pause dur="0.8"/> and i'm going to start off by <pause dur="0.2"/> # sort of putting the bigger picture and also describing <pause dur="0.5"/> what was <pause dur="0.3"/> researched in the nineteen-eighties and that tended to be <pause dur="0.4"/> making a comparison

between reading from screen and reading from paper <pause dur="0.8"/> # the second part is just reading from screen <pause dur="0.6"/> and apologies because these case studies in reading from screen are my own work the reason being 'cause not very much has been done <pause dur="0.3"/> # <pause dur="0.9"/> it's a shame about that <pause dur="1.2"/> okay <pause dur="0.3"/> so <pause dur="0.4"/> looking at reading from screen <pause dur="0.4"/> compared with reading from paper <pause dur="1.7"/> right <pause dur="0.2"/> first it's useful to really remind ourselves about what the basic differences are <pause dur="0.4"/> and that they are fairly obvious <pause dur="0.3"/> # but they're listed here and i'll go through them and <pause dur="1.0"/> they're here also because some research in the nineteen-eighties <pause dur="0.2"/> was essentially trying to find out <pause dur="0.9"/> what might be <pause dur="0.7"/> what might account for the differences that there are between reading from screen and reading from paper <pause dur="0.6"/> so to pre-empt the the results essentially you read slower from screen <pause dur="0.2"/> and so <pause dur="0.4"/> a group of researchers based at I-B-M <pause dur="0.5"/> wanted to find out <pause dur="0.8"/> what could it be that is different about <pause dur="0.3"/> a screen compared with <pause dur="0.6"/> a piece of paper reading from print <pause dur="0.4"/> that might be

responsible for these differences so why is it harder to read from screen <pause dur="1.1"/> so what we know are are different is the orientation because screens are most of the time upright in front of us whereas paper <pause dur="0.6"/> can be held like that but a lot of the time it will be <pause dur="0.4"/> down <pause dur="0.8"/> on the table <pause dur="0.2"/> so there's the orientation difference <pause dur="1.4"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> the visual angle is different that's measuring from <pause dur="0.3"/> the text or whatever on the screen <pause dur="0.7"/> or on paper and how far we sit away from that and measuring that angle <pause dur="1.2"/> we tend to sit further away <pause dur="0.2"/> from screen <pause dur="0.5"/> than we do <pause dur="0.2"/> from <pause dur="0.5"/> from paper <pause dur="0.6"/> # and therefore the visual angle's different so that might be a possibility <pause dur="1.2"/> the aspect ratio is different in other words most screens tend to be <pause dur="0.2"/> it's true of this one <pause dur="0.4"/> landscape rather than protrait <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> that's <pause dur="0.4"/> that's generalizing and talking about the average sort of screen so you'll have a wide screen <pause dur="0.3"/> but it won't be particularly deep so there's a difference <pause dur="1.1"/> and we've got difference that <trunc>re</trunc> that relate to how the <pause dur="0.6"/> # how the

text how the pixels are put onto the screen that's the dynamics so that the screen is refreshed rather than having something sort of solid in front of you <pause dur="0.5"/> on paper <pause dur="0.5"/> and you get flicker with screen <pause dur="1.4"/> # the image polarity now that's <pause dur="0.7"/> less the case now a difference it's less likely to be different now when we read from screen than print <pause dur="0.5"/> but it used to be the case that there were all sorts of <pause dur="0.6"/> colours i suppose used on screen <pause dur="0.4"/> so now we're <pause dur="0.2"/> <trunc>m</trunc> more likely to see black text on a white background on screen just like we have in print <pause dur="0.5"/> but <pause dur="0.3"/> people tried white text on a black background and green text on a <pause dur="0.2"/> black background <pause dur="0.7"/> # as i say now it's more likely that we're we're reading the same because they did find that black on white is better <pause dur="1.6"/> and then we've got all sorts of typographic characteristics that that might <pause dur="0.4"/> that once in the nineteen-eighties were different on screen compared with print <pause dur="1.2"/> so actually what these researchers did was to <pause dur="0.2"/> look at each particular <pause dur="0.2"/> variable

or each particular <pause dur="0.2"/> difference and to try and isolate whether that one was the one <pause dur="0.4"/> that was responsible <pause dur="0.3"/> for it being more difficult to read from screen <pause dur="0.7"/> and they found out that none of them seem to account for it <pause dur="0.6"/> # but when you put them all together <pause dur="0.2"/> then there is this <pause dur="0.3"/> this problem <pause dur="0.8"/> so they couldn't actually say <pause dur="0.4"/> what it was in particular that accounted for that <pause dur="0.5"/> and it's # <pause dur="0.4"/> just like yeah <gap reason="name" extent="1 word"/> you said that last week <pause dur="0.2"/> didn't you when you put lots of things together <pause dur="0.4"/> it improves the design but thing <pause dur="0.6"/> individually those things might not make a difference it's sort of the same thing in reverse <pause dur="0.7"/> you remember <pause dur="0.6"/> you do <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" dur="1"/><pause dur="0.7"/> right <pause dur="0.4"/> along the bottom here <pause dur="0.5"/> there is # <pause dur="2.0"/> this this is going back to Jakob Nielsen who i've <pause dur="0.2"/> mentioned quite a few times he has this sort of <pause dur="0.2"/> column i suppose called Alert Box <pause dur="0.6"/> it's <pause dur="0.3"/> it's quite an interesting thing to read so i would just recommend # casting your eye over that so you'd be able to get to that from the web

pages it's just quite a good reference <pause dur="0.5"/> it feels sort of a bit naive in relation to print the first part of it but as you <pause dur="0.5"/> get lower down it's really pointing out some of the differences which is a <pause dur="0.4"/> think there's some useful things just to to remind you so that might be worth <pause dur="0.5"/> following up <pause dur="2.5"/> okay so the conclusions of this were and and should repeat it was in the <trunc>n</trunc> late nineteen-eighties so we were talking about <pause dur="0.4"/> different sorts of screens to the sorts of screens we have now <pause dur="0.6"/> but you can't find a single factor responsible and if <pause dur="0.4"/> if the quality is improved there there ought to be <pause dur="0.3"/> smaller differences between reading from screen and from print <pause dur="2.7"/> right so if we move on to some of the research that's been done that has <pause dur="0.7"/> compared <pause dur="0.9"/> how we read from screen <pause dur="0.6"/> # or the outcomes when we read from screen compared with paper <pause dur="3.0"/> people have divided up <pause dur="0.2"/> the way in which you measure this into two categories <pause dur="0.4"/> and these are outcome measures and process measures so i'll start with the outcome

measures <pause dur="0.7"/> i suspect this is all terribly familiar to you <gap reason="name" extent="1 word"/> isn't it 'cause you've done an essay on this yeah <pause dur="1.2"/> there's a review article <pause dur="0.3"/> by <pause dur="0.2"/> Andrew Dillon <pause dur="0.2"/> that i just noticed just now is not on your reading list but it's a good one that does actually summarize all of this <pause dur="0.4"/> what i've put on your reading list is the book that <pause dur="0.5"/> # is much more comprehensive <pause dur="0.3"/> so <pause dur="1.2"/> right so <pause dur="0.8"/> this # these are sort of summaries of or <pause dur="0.3"/> bringing together # the various studies that have been done <pause dur="0.6"/> and it seemed to be the case that <pause dur="0.4"/> all the research that was done <pause dur="0.5"/> initially <pause dur="0.4"/> # in relation to reading from screen <pause dur="0.4"/> were making comparisons with print it seemed that that was the only interest you know why is it different let's always make this comparison <pause dur="0.9"/> so most of the <pause dur="0.3"/> studies that were done found that <pause dur="0.2"/> people read more slowly from screen than they do from paper <pause dur="0.3"/> or from print <pause dur="0.5"/> and it's about twenty to thirty per cent slower so that's that's reasonably substantial <pause dur="1.8"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> there were <pause dur="0.6"/> or there was an odd study # as in the

case of just one study it wasn't particularly odd <pause dur="0.5"/> # that found that reading speed wasn't affected so there wasn't a difference between print and between <pause dur="0.2"/> and screen <pause dur="1.0"/> and it was <pause dur="0.3"/> in in bringing them together and seeing that this particular study was different it's probably the case that <pause dur="0.2"/> the texts were too short <pause dur="0.5"/> because if you don't give <pause dur="0.2"/> a long enough time period for people to read then you're not actually going to pull out these differences <pause dur="0.4"/> so i would say it's a pretty reliable finding that we read slower <pause dur="0.3"/> from screen <pause dur="1.9"/> terms of accuracy one of the ways that you can see there the accuracy is measured is by giving a proofreading task <pause dur="0.4"/> which is a different type of accuracy to saying <pause dur="0.2"/> well can you acculatery accurately remember what you've read <pause dur="0.4"/> # it is obviously looking for errors on screen <pause dur="0.9"/> and <pause dur="0.8"/> those studies found that it you weren't people weren't finding it more difficult to proofread from screen <pause dur="0.5"/> than from paper <pause dur="0.7"/> and i don't know about you but that seems to me a rather

surprising finding <pause dur="0.6"/> because how many times do you <pause dur="0.3"/> look at something on screen print it out and then find that there are typos <pause dur="0.6"/> now <pause dur="0.3"/> either we <pause dur="0.4"/> don't put the same sort of <pause dur="0.2"/> attention into <pause dur="0.6"/> checking on screen <pause dur="0.4"/> or <pause dur="0.3"/> it is more difficult <pause dur="0.5"/> now i i'm not saying that that study is # <pause dur="0.9"/> that there's anything wrong with that study <pause dur="0.5"/> # the result still <pause dur="0.2"/> or the results still stand but i suspect that the particular task wasn't sensitive enough to pick out <pause dur="0.3"/> the differences that i think <pause dur="0.5"/> are probably there </u><pause dur="1.1"/> <u who="sm1264" trans="pause"> <gap reason="inaudible" extent="3 secs"/><pause dur="0.5"/> all of them the results were so dependent on the task <gap reason="inaudible" extent="2 secs"/><pause dur="0.4"/> </u><u who="nf1263" trans="pause"> yeah </u><u who="sm1264" trans="overlap"> some of them require them to read <pause dur="0.4"/> the screen and then write an essay on it </u><pause dur="0.5"/> <u who="nf1263" trans="pause"> yeah </u><u who="sm1264" trans="overlap"> and the task and that will be dependent on the person's # ability to write an essay you see and have different results <pause dur="0.6"/> just from that <pause dur="0.3"/> <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/></u><u who="nf1263" trans="overlap"> you mean they didn't <pause dur="0.4"/> compare that with them reading from print and writing an essay they just </u><pause dur="0.2"/> <u who="sm1264" trans="pause"> yeah they did it both ways but often the tasks in the experiments were completely different from each other so it really depended on individual's ability </u><pause dur="0.3"/> <u who="nf1263" trans="pause"> yeah </u><u who="sm1264" trans="overlap"> <unclear>ability of</unclear> the task as well </u><pause dur="0.3"/> <u who="nf1263" trans="pause"> yes right so maybe the <pause dur="0.2"/> the <pause dur="0.4"/> the tasks are questionable then in themselves they're </u><u who="sm1264" trans="overlap"> that's the # thing <pause dur="0.2"/> i think <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/> in that they found the tasks were more <gap reason="inaudible" extent="2 secs"/> </u><pause dur="0.3"/> <u who="nf1263" trans="pause"> yeah </u><u who="sm1264" trans="overlap"> <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/> problems </u><pause dur="1.8"/> <u who="nf1263" trans="pause"> yeah can </u><pause dur="0.4"/> <u who="sf1265" trans="pause"> i think also you find that # <pause dur="0.5"/> when you <pause dur="0.2"/> if you're <pause dur="0.6"/> on you know you're on screen <pause dur="0.5"/> people rely on the <pause dur="0.3"/> spellchecker</u><pause dur="0.7"/> <u who="nf1263" trans="pause"> that's true </u><u who="sf1265" trans="overlap"> to <pause dur="0.2"/> for everything whereas they actually <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 word"/> <pause dur="0.8"/> and it's only when you've <pause dur="0.2"/> got it you know in your hand reading it that you realize you haven't covered all the <pause dur="0.7"/> you know grammar 'cause they don't <pause dur="0.2"/> they can't pick it up <pause dur="0.2"/> all the time with spellcheckers </u><pause dur="0.4"/> <u who="nf1263" trans="pause"> yeah so that suggests that there's probably <pause dur="0.2"/> both things going on

we're not <pause dur="0.5"/> necessarily <pause dur="0.2"/> trying so hard i mean maybe </u><u who="sf1265" trans="overlap"> <unclear>lets</unclear> you think the spellchecker will pick it up </u><u who="nf1263" trans="overlap"> because we think it pick it up <pause dur="0.2"/> but maybe also i mean <pause dur="0.6"/> the main thing is that the resolution is poorer <pause dur="0.2"/> isn't it and so it's it's harder <pause dur="0.8"/> i would say that has to make it slightly harder to read and because of that <pause dur="0.7"/> # i suspect there's there's an influence <pause dur="0.3"/> so if we get to screens of <pause dur="0.5"/> six-hundred dots per inch <pause dur="0.2"/> then maybe <pause dur="0.4"/> we would expect not to have the problems <pause dur="0.3"/> but we would still have them if <pause dur="0.6"/> say we we're relying on <pause dur="0.2"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> on automatic checks that aren't <pause dur="0.2"/> going to be infallible <pause dur="0.2"/> you know <pause dur="1.3"/> yeah <pause dur="0.4"/> so i i <pause dur="0.2"/> it's also 'cause we mentioned fatigue as well <trunc>y</trunc> it's also the case i would <pause dur="0.2"/> i mean i would feel that it's it is more tiring <pause dur="0.6"/> reading for a long time on screen <pause dur="0.4"/> but can you put <pause dur="0.2"/> people in an experiment and try and simulate the sort of natural tasks i'm not sure that you can <pause dur="0.9"/> so <pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> so there's suggestions there <pause dur="0.3"/> that if you <pause dur="0.7"/> carry on reading for longer maybe there are <pause dur="0.3"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> fatiguing effects <pause dur="0.4"/> and if you have a demanding

task then you're less accurate but # <pause dur="1.7"/> who knows so those are are outcome measures because they're measuring sort of performance how quickly you do something or whether it's got <pause dur="0.5"/> there are errors or things like that think i've got a few more <pause dur="0.2"/> yeah continue with the outcome measures <pause dur="0.4"/> another outcome measure is whether <pause dur="0.7"/> you can recall <pause dur="0.2"/> and understand what you've read <pause dur="0.8"/> and again the studies have shown that there isn't a difference so we're equally as good at understanding what we've read on screen and on paper according to that <pause dur="0.7"/> but there is always in this sort of work the possibility that <pause dur="0.4"/> we trade-off how quickly we read with <pause dur="0.3"/> how well we take it in this is the speed-accuracy trade-off <pause dur="1.0"/> so that for example we might decide to slow down our reading from screen <pause dur="0.5"/> to make sure that we <pause dur="0.3"/> take it all in because we're going to be asked questions afterwards <pause dur="0.5"/> or if we speed up reading we might actually get worse in terms of comprehension <pause dur="1.5"/> so it's important in in sort of assessing whether

something <pause dur="0.7"/> is legible i suppose we're saying <trunc>i</trunc> is it <pause dur="0.3"/> is the screen legible but you <pause dur="0.2"/> you bring you take into account not only how quickly you read but whether people <pause dur="0.6"/> also understand what they've read <pause dur="0.7"/> and that's true of all legibility research <pause dur="1.4"/> and then people were asked for preferences and this is where in a a very strange sort of experiment it seems to be the <pause dur="0.7"/> the outcome is that if you use high quality you've got high quality screens high quality paper <pause dur="0.2"/> then no preference <pause dur="0.3"/> but people were preferring paper because it was a higher quality <pause dur="0.5"/> # output <pause dur="0.7"/> so <pause dur="0.7"/> don't think that's surprising at all that says nothing about the differences between <pause dur="0.4"/> screen and paper <pause dur="0.4"/> just a preference for higher quality higher resolution <pause dur="1.6"/>

right so the other comparisons are the the process measures and we've got fewer of those <pause dur="0.3"/> these are harder to measure but it's as it sounds you're <pause dur="0.5"/> they're looking at how people are doing something rather than what the end result of that doing is <pause dur="0.5"/> so as you probably recall eye movement studies have been done for reading print <pause dur="1.1"/> looking at <pause dur="0.3"/> # how big the the saccades are the <pause dur="0.2"/> the way <trunc>wh</trunc> when we jump from one part of a word to another part <pause dur="0.5"/> # how long we fixate for whether we need to go back if we've missed something <pause dur="1.0"/> # so those sorts of studies have been done for reading from screen as well but not found a a big difference <pause dur="0.5"/> # i suspect i wouldn't have predicted that because i <trunc>s</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> i guess we're <pause dur="0.3"/> so practised at reading print that this sort of automatic process will <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> take effect from reading from screen as well but <pause dur="0.6"/> that's my guess looks like there's no

differences there <pause dur="1.5"/> # and then some fairly obvious things the manipulation is less direct that's really just pointing out what we know anyway that when you've got paper <pause dur="0.4"/> you turn over a page by <pause dur="0.4"/> # sort of picking it up or whatever <pause dur="0.3"/> whereas we've got the mouse as the intervening variable or the keyboard or whatever <pause dur="0.2"/> that's in between <pause dur="0.5"/> us and the action <pause dur="0.3"/> taking effect <pause dur="1.4"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> but basically if the appropriate tools are there then there's not a <pause dur="0.2"/> particular problem <pause dur="0.6"/> and i guess we're getting past the time when <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="1.0"/> you come across people <pause dur="0.5"/> well when you come across a lot of people that aren't able to to use a mouse <pause dur="0.6"/> i mean i <trunc>i</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> <trunc>y</trunc> don't have to go back too far in teaching in this department to have <pause dur="0.4"/> people not able <pause dur="0.7"/> initially to use a mouse but i don't think we're going to <pause dur="0.2"/> get that sort of thing any more <pause dur="0.9"/> # but actually in the experiments that i'm going to describe in just a moment we didn't use the mouse because we wanted to <pause dur="0.4"/> have someone <pause dur="0.3"/> come in to do our experiment and not have to

say well you know when you move this up the cursor will go up sort of thing <pause dur="0.4"/> so we <pause dur="0.7"/> only let people use the keyboard <pause dur="0.6"/> 'cause there is that initial learning <pause dur="0.5"/> do any of you remember when you first used a mouse <pause dur="0.4"/> what it felt like <pause dur="1.9"/> <vocal desc="laughter" n="sl" iterated="y" dur="1"/> </u><pause dur="0.2"/> <u who="sf1266" trans="pause"> <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/></u><pause dur="0.8"/> <u who="nf1263" trans="pause"> did you have any trouble <pause dur="0.5"/> did you <pause dur="0.3"/> 'cause some people are # are sort of <pause dur="0.6"/> like this <pause dur="0.3"/> yeah <pause dur="0.2"/> when they <trunc>s</trunc> first start because <pause dur="0.8"/> because you don't realize you can <pause dur="0.2"/> if you get to the edge of the table you can pick the mouse up and <pause dur="0.2"/> put it back where it was and still go down again <pause dur="0.5"/> you don't have to have the same amount of movement as as you have on the screen <pause dur="0.6"/> none of you did that did you i don't know <pause dur="0.5"/> i've seen quite a lot of people doing that <pause dur="0.9"/> you're all very quiet as well <pause dur="0.9"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" dur="1"/><pause dur="0.9"/> # <pause dur="1.2"/> and then finally what i've talked about quite a lot is the is the navigation <pause dur="0.2"/> that it's more complicated than <pause dur="0.3"/> in <pause dur="0.2"/> in books we've got i suppose more things that we can do moving forwards backwards previous <pause dur="0.2"/> pages and things like that <pause dur="0.4"/>

and we might get lost <pause dur="0.3"/> so those are just sort of summarizing some of the <pause dur="0.3"/> the main differences <pause dur="1.4"/> okay so those <pause dur="0.2"/> that is what <pause dur="0.4"/> people were interested in making the comparisons between <pause dur="0.5"/> reading from screen and reading from print <pause dur="0.3"/> this is moving into the second <pause dur="0.7"/> section which <trunc>i</trunc> <pause dur="0.4"/> are <pause dur="0.3"/> it's basically two case studies of <pause dur="1.1"/> reading from screen <pause dur="1.1"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> so i decided that i didn't want to compare <pause dur="0.5"/> reading print and reading from <trunc>stree</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> screen because i didn't actually see the point of that <pause dur="0.4"/> because yes you find it's different <pause dur="0.2"/> but really it seems to me <pause dur="0.3"/> what we want to do <pause dur="0.3"/> is to find out how we can <pause dur="0.3"/> make it better or easier for us to read from screen <pause dur="0.6"/> rather than worry about how it's different from print <pause dur="0.8"/> and as i said at the beginning there wasn't <pause dur="0.8"/> or there still isn't very much done on <pause dur="2.1"/> typographic <pause dur="0.2"/> variables or things that i would call typographic in relation to to reading from screen <pause dur="0.5"/> so we've got all this stuff on the legibility of print <pause dur="0.2"/> admittedly a lot of it done by Tinker <pause dur="0.2"/> and coworkers <pause dur="0.8"/>

but there's not the volume that's of research for for reading from screen and so you have to think about why and i suppose one obvious reason is that <pause dur="0.7"/> it's more recent <pause dur="0.6"/> and so maybe there hasn't been time for people to do the research <pause dur="1.2"/> or <pause dur="0.7"/> maybe <pause dur="0.2"/> people think well we know it all because we've got the the legibility of print research so <pause dur="0.3"/> we'll just use that <pause dur="1.0"/> or <pause dur="0.6"/> maybe <pause dur="0.2"/> people get <pause dur="0.5"/> # frustrated by the fact that screens are changing and so they think well what's the point of doing this research because in five years time <pause dur="0.4"/> it'll be obsolete because there'll be a different screen <pause dur="0.6"/> and certainly <pause dur="0.2"/> the the <trunc>s</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> some of the stuff that has been done <pause dur="0.4"/> again from the nineteen-eighties early nineties <pause dur="0.6"/> doesn't use <pause dur="0.2"/> <trunc>d</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> the same sort of screens as we have now so you do think <pause dur="0.3"/> well is it <pause dur="0.4"/> is that useless because <pause dur="0.2"/> it's a different sort of screen <pause dur="1.8"/> or <pause dur="0.4"/> i've got one more <pause dur="0.2"/> up my sleeve as to why people don't do this sort of research <pause dur="0.5"/> people don't think <pause dur="0.3"/> typography is important coming back to our theme of last

week but is it this is a variation on it <pause dur="0.7"/> because <pause dur="1.1"/> people that work on <pause dur="0.5"/> computer stuff or human-computer <pause dur="0.2"/> interaction stuff <pause dur="0.4"/> tend not to be typographers they're not okay <pause dur="0.3"/> so they might be computer scientists or they might be psychologists or whoever <pause dur="0.9"/> and i do have some evidence that they they don't <pause dur="0.2"/> really think that the sort of factors that we're interested in i hope like let's say line length 'cause that's what we're going to be talking about <pause dur="0.6"/> they sort of think well yes so what <pause dur="0.6"/> # so this is sort of the same theme as last week <pause dur="0.6"/> so you're not going to find people that are going to put together it seems to me the typography with <pause dur="0.2"/> the <pause dur="0.3"/> the screen stuff <pause dur="0.2"/> so <pause dur="0.3"/> i should say well great that's lucky because i'm doing that and <pause dur="0.4"/> there's not many <pause dur="0.2"/> many more people doing it <pause dur="0.5"/> but when people say the sort of so what it's a bit disheartening <pause dur="0.9"/> well that's enough of the preamble though <pause dur="0.5"/> so <pause dur="0.2"/> i wanted to find out really <pause dur="0.6"/> # answers to questions about the legibility of text on screen <pause dur="0.4"/> and i

phrased the first question in a fairly general way by saying what amount of text <pause dur="0.5"/> really is best for maximum legibility <pause dur="0.3"/> and that's 'cause i'm talking about layout but i'm talking about things like the line length or the number of columns <pause dur="0.5"/> so there is a different volume of text on screen <pause dur="0.2"/> if you've got a long line length <pause dur="0.3"/> as compared to a short one <pause dur="0.7"/> now i know you know what line lengths look like but i will be showing you the material in a bit <pause dur="0.4"/> so that was the first question <pause dur="0.3"/> and that was combined with <pause dur="0.2"/> # what i've called method of movement or the person i worked with called <pause dur="0.4"/> and all of that is either scrollling <pause dur="0.4"/> going down line by line through the text or paging <pause dur="0.4"/> which is <pause dur="0.3"/> going from one screenful of text pressing a button and getting a second screenful <pause dur="0.3"/> so it's equivalent to turning over the page yeah so you don't gradually scroll through <pause dur="0.7"/> so those two things # were varied and i looked at <pause dur="0.2"/> in the first <pause dur="0.7"/> experiments that i did <pause dur="3.2"/> right so <pause dur="0.6"/> what was i measuring and basically i

was trying to measure lots of things because <pause dur="0.3"/> as i sort of mentioned last week it can be very difficult to find <pause dur="0.6"/> any differences <pause dur="0.3"/> so if you <pause dur="0.2"/> have quite a broad spectrum <pause dur="0.3"/> of # measures then you hope that somewhere something will come out of it <pause dur="0.7"/> and i wouldn't dream of comparing typefaces 'cause i don't think anything would come out of it <pause dur="0.8"/> so <pause dur="0.3"/> got people to read from screen <pause dur="0.2"/> and timed how long it took them to silently read from screen <pause dur="0.4"/> and the way that we did that was basically the the computer started the clock at the beginning <pause dur="0.3"/> and when they got to the end it stopped the clock <pause dur="0.5"/> so <pause dur="0.3"/> i didn't even have to sort of sit there and watch them <pause dur="1.6"/> i <pause dur="1.3"/> checked their comprehension and i wouldn't say i tested their comprehension because <pause dur="0.5"/> it was <pause dur="0.4"/> not a particularly sensitive way to measure comprehension <pause dur="0.6"/> what i did was # borrowing from some other people <pause dur="0.8"/> i asked <pause dur="0.3"/> or i put a set of questions <pause dur="0.3"/> and said <pause dur="0.2"/> could you answer these questions from what you've read <pause dur="0.6"/> so they didn't have to answer them <pause dur="0.5"/> but they could

they just had to say yes or no <pause dur="0.6"/> so there would be a question like you know did <pause dur="0.5"/> Fred fall down the hill <pause dur="0.4"/> now if that had been included in what they had read then they could say yes i could answer that <pause dur="0.3"/> if it hadn't been they would say no <pause dur="0.5"/> now it might sound an extremely obscure way of of checking comprehension <pause dur="1.0"/> but the reason to do it this way is that is does check whether someone's read because if they get fifty per cent right <pause dur="0.2"/> then <pause dur="0.2"/> they're guessing <pause dur="0.2"/> so they haven't <pause dur="0.5"/> or they haven't taken it in properly <pause dur="0.8"/> and the other thing is that it's very easy to mark <pause dur="0.2"/> because if you <pause dur="0.5"/> ask the question # <pause dur="0.4"/> what did Fred do <pause dur="0.9"/> then you have to decide whether what someone answers is correct or not because they're not going to use exactly the right wording <pause dur="0.4"/> so it's essentially just easier to do this sort of thing </u><pause dur="0.6"/> <u who="sf1267" trans="pause"> do they know they're being timed <pause dur="0.3"/> <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/> </u><pause dur="0.2"/> <u who="nf1263" trans="pause"> yeah they did yeah <pause dur="0.2"/> yeah that's a good point to make though <pause dur="0.4"/> i think we sort of said they also knew they had to answer questions so that <trunc>th</trunc> you got to <pause dur="0.5"/> think are they going to

speed through or <pause dur="0.3"/> and think that's more important or <pause dur="0.3"/> or sort of <pause dur="1.0"/> or <pause dur="0.2"/> try and make sure they understood the questions <pause dur="0.2"/> no could answer the questions <pause dur="1.2"/> # the other thing we did i've called it record of keystrokes was again the computer <pause dur="0.4"/> sort of recorded how they moved through the document <pause dur="0.5"/> so <pause dur="0.4"/> we took the mouse away and they had to use the cursor keys so you go down with the pointer <pause dur="0.4"/> and and back up with the pointer <pause dur="0.4"/> and every time they pressed a key <pause dur="0.2"/> there was a record of when they pressed it and the fact that they had pressed it <pause dur="0.5"/> so what you can map out is whether someone is <pause dur="1.2"/> scrolling through fairly slowly so perhaps moving a little bit <pause dur="0.2"/> reading a little bit moving a little bit <pause dur="0.4"/> or perhaps whether they're reading a whole screenful <pause dur="0.5"/> and then scrolling <pause dur="0.2"/> through a whole screenful <pause dur="0.6"/> for the page <pause dur="0.6"/> pages that's not particularly interesting but it is for the scrolling <pause dur="0.6"/> you can't tell when someone is reading but you can tell when they're not scrolling and you might guess that they're probably

reading if if they're not scrolling <pause dur="0.4"/> 'cause otherwise they'd just be looking out the window <pause dur="0.5"/> which is a possibility of course we can't help that <pause dur="1.5"/> and then finally we we got the <trunc>s</trunc> the <trunc>s</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> in a sense the preference although that wasn't quite the question but <pause dur="0.3"/> after they'd done the reading <pause dur="0.5"/> # then <pause dur="0.6"/> they were shown <pause dur="0.2"/> pairs of things they'd read and said which do you think is easiest to read <pause dur="0.3"/> and they get all of the combinations of pairs <pause dur="0.4"/> so you might think that they would base that on <pause dur="0.5"/> their <pause dur="0.4"/> feelings about having read it or maybe they'd just base it on what they <pause dur="0.4"/> <trunc>s</trunc> <trunc>th</trunc> see in front of them <pause dur="0.2"/> but certainly they had experienced the reading at that point <pause dur="1.1"/> so these these are sort of methods for for this lot of work <pause dur="0.5"/> so <pause dur="0.9"/> first one looking at line length <pause dur="0.4"/> and <pause dur="0.5"/> trying to show you what it looks like <pause dur="2.7"/> this is the shortest line length you'll be pleased to hear <pause dur="0.5"/> and i can't simulate it exactly 'cause i don't know how to get rid of the two # menus at the top <pause dur="0.3"/> but essentially there were no menus at all <pause dur="0.4"/>

so you've got # a screen that only has the text on it <pause dur="0.6"/> and it was in this typeface and the paragraphs were like this so this is approximately twenty-five characters per line the narrowest <pause dur="0.8"/> and <pause dur="0.3"/> i can't also <trunc>ca</trunc> show you the <trunc>scro</trunc> the # the paging but if you were scrolling <pause dur="0.9"/> mm then you would go down <pause dur="0.3"/> line by line and then when you got to the <pause dur="0.2"/> bottom <pause dur="0.6"/> it would start to to move up <pause dur="0.3"/> but in fact in the paged version it would jump <pause dur="0.2"/> from the top to the bottom <pause dur="0.6"/>

so this one's <pause dur="1.0"/> the narrow one <pause dur="0.2"/> there were six line lengths i'm so i'm showing you the narrowest <pause dur="0.2"/> one vaguely in the middle <pause dur="0.5"/> oh that's if i can find it <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="3.3"/> right that's twenty-five the one in the middle and then i'll show you the the the extreme one the longest line length <pause dur="0.3"/> so that's fifty-five characters per line so you're probably feeling a bit more comfortable with this one <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="1.1"/> and then <pause dur="0.7"/> the the widest one which essentially was done to fill the whole screen <pause dur="0.7"/> okay <pause dur="1.7"/> so <pause dur="3.0"/> if we get back <pause dur="10.4"/> right so there were six line lengths and they

could either be in a scrolling version or in # a paged version <pause dur="0.5"/> and did you expect this that the one that was read the fastest was that one that filled the screen <pause dur="0.5"/> one-hundred characters per line <pause dur="1.9"/> i didn't <pause dur="1.0"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> to be fair # <pause dur="0.8"/> although it was read <pause dur="0.4"/> it was the fastest i think if you <pause dur="0.2"/> 'cause you know a little bit about statistics it was only <pause dur="0.8"/> significantly different from the very narrowest one so # <pause dur="0.3"/> but it was still if you looked at at <pause dur="0.2"/> looked right across the six of them it was the <pause dur="0.3"/> the fastest one <pause dur="0.4"/> so i've thought ah well maybe i've got something here <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> but when people <pause dur="0.4"/> making their judgements about what's easiest to read they did not consider that the easiest to read they thought it was <pause dur="0.6"/> the least <pause dur="0.2"/> easiest to read so they probably had the sort of reaction that you would have i think that # <pause dur="0.3"/> that really looks quite overwhelming <pause dur="1.6"/> # the check on comprehension <trunc>ju</trunc> didn't show any differences because of course there is the possibility of this speed-accuracy trade-off <pause dur="0.5"/> you see <pause dur="0.6"/> a screen full

of text and you think ergh i'm just going to try and get through that <trunc>ge</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> # and then you you don't actually take it in <pause dur="0.5"/> but it appeared not to be the case <pause dur="1.3"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> now needless to say you know sort of <pause dur="0.3"/> colleagues didn't <pause dur="0.6"/> think this was <pause dur="0.2"/> the result that i should find or it's the sort of thing that you think know can you really go around recommending these long line lengths on screen <pause dur="0.4"/> certainly before i did this research <pause dur="0.2"/> i was giving tutorials saying <pause dur="0.3"/> use quite short line lengths on screen probably shorter than in print because <pause dur="0.2"/> it's more difficult to read from the screen <pause dur="1.0"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> so you look for reasons why you might get something like this was there something about the experiment <pause dur="0.4"/> and if you can i won't go back to it but if you can think back to that narrow line length there was a screen <pause dur="0.6"/> the screen was all white the background was white and certainly some of the people found it quite glaring <pause dur="0.3"/> so there might have been a problem <pause dur="0.6"/> with line lengths that don't fill the screen because

it's bright and it's glaring <pause dur="0.4"/> so we changed to grey <pause dur="0.2"/> and just to show you as an image of what that looked like rather than the actual screen <pause dur="1.5"/> so now we've just got the background as grey <pause dur="0.4"/> and didn't go through all six line lengths just went through the twenty-five the <trunc>s</trunc> the shortest the middle and the longest <pause dur="0.6"/> and # well it got a bit more blurry <pause dur="0.3"/> # now # not the screen the results got # <pause dur="0.3"/> got blurred <pause dur="0.5"/> # and it wasn't so obvious that this long line length was speeding people up <pause dur="0.7"/> what was certainly <pause dur="0.4"/> obvious and it again is logically the case anyway <pause dur="0.4"/> is that if you've got a very narrow line length you've got to scroll down <pause dur="0.4"/> sort of screens and screens <pause dur="0.2"/> for the same length as document if <pause dur="0.4"/> if you've got a wide line length you've only got a few screenfuls <pause dur="0.3"/> so it's actually quicker mechnically <pause dur="0.5"/> to get through <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> a short fat <pause dur="0.2"/> a sort of a wide <pause dur="0.4"/> # not particularly tall document <pause dur="0.2"/> so maybe that's all it it was i didn't think it was but that certainly was contributing <pause dur="0.3"/> having to scroll

through a long document <pause dur="3.0"/> right it sort of <pause dur="0.2"/> that never became totally clear but i moved on to something related although not exactly the same <pause dur="0.4"/> which was to compare <pause dur="0.9"/> columns of text <pause dur="1.3"/> because and i forgot to mention this bit earlier <pause dur="0.5"/> this work was funded by Microsoft Corporation because they really <pause dur="0.4"/> wanted to find out about <pause dur="0.2"/> how people read from screen or rather what's # useful layouts and so on and so forth <pause dur="0.8"/> and i know last week we talked about sort of <pause dur="0.4"/> who does experiments influencing # the results but fortunately they <pause dur="0.4"/> there was <pause dur="0.2"/> no way in which they they influenced these 'cause they couldn't really <pause dur="0.3"/> except to say the sort of things they were interested in looking at <pause dur="0.7"/> and about this time which was <pause dur="0.7"/> probably about five years ago <pause dur="0.5"/> # they were starting an online magazine web magazine called Slate and they were interested in whether to use single columns or multiple columns for that <pause dur="1.3"/> now <pause dur="0.9"/> my my view is <pause dur="0.2"/> that you can't <pause dur="0.7"/> put text on screen in three columns and have it scrolling <pause dur="1.0"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> now i

know <trunc>thi</trunc> this <pause dur="0.5"/> is true on the web <pause dur="0.2"/> but if you think about what you're having to do then you're having to read down <pause dur="0.5"/> scroll down get to the bottom of a column <pause dur="0.2"/> scroll back up <pause dur="0.4"/> come down again scroll back up <pause dur="0.5"/> so my reckoning having <pause dur="0.2"/> three columns it's got to be in a paged format you've got to be able to read what's on screen <pause dur="0.3"/> and then get the next <pause dur="0.7"/> page as such the next screenful </u><pause dur="0.4"/> <u who="sm1268" trans="pause"> can you not have three columns and just wait for them <pause dur="0.2"/> <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/> <pause dur="0.6"/> <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/><pause dur="1.2"/> <gap reason="inaudible" extent="1 sec"/></u><u who="nf1263" trans="latching"> you <trunc>wa</trunc> right yeah <pause dur="0.4"/> <vocal desc="laughter" n="ss" iterated="y" dur="1"/> the trouble is i'm <trunc>ass</trunc> <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/>i'm assuming <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/> that everyone has the same size screen of course because if you've got a tiny one you're going to have to scroll down anyway <pause dur="0.6"/> but <pause dur="0.3"/> that was where i started from that three columns has got to be paged <pause dur="0.7"/> since i was comparing it with a single column i then compared it with that column <pause dur="0.3"/> being scrolled or being paged <pause dur="0.2"/> so that finds out whether it's scrolling that's causing something or whether it's the columns <pause dur="1.1"/> # <pause dur="0.8"/> right <pause dur="0.3"/> show you the sort of size that i was working with so there <pause dur="0.3"/> gone

back to the <pause dur="0.3"/> the grey surround # <pause dur="0.3"/> and <pause dur="0.2"/> the three columns yeah <pause dur="0.3"/> so for those that you probably did all get it by then i i think you can't sort of carry on <pause dur="0.4"/> having to scroll down and come back up here <pause dur="0.3"/> so you do all three <pause dur="0.4"/> and then you press somethng and you get another screenful <pause dur="1.2"/> and the single column was about eighty characters per line so we're probably talking <pause dur="0.4"/> yeah it covered the same sort of area <pause dur="0.4"/> it's a pretty <pause dur="0.4"/> pretty long line again <pause dur="3.3"/> right <pause dur="0.2"/> so what we found there was that the the <pause dur="0.2"/> it was the single <pause dur="0.5"/> column the fairly long line <pause dur="0.3"/> length that was read fastest faster than three columns <pause dur="0.4"/> # and it was faster in paged because i think you basically it's faster because you haven't got to scroll so you just save time on <pause dur="0.3"/> having to do that mechanical thing <pause dur="1.4"/> but we happened to be recording how old <trunc>p</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> our <pause dur="0.3"/> participants were <pause dur="0.5"/> and most of them were within this age range we didn't take exact ages within the age range eighteen to twenty-four because we recruited from within the university <pause dur="0.6"/> but we

did have some that were <pause dur="0.3"/> twenty-five <pause dur="0.2"/> plus <vocal desc="exclamation" iterated="n"/> <pause dur="0.5"/> and they showed a different pattern or rather the <pause dur="0.4"/> the younger ones the eighteen to twenty-four year olds <pause dur="0.5"/> were <pause dur="0.8"/> showing this <pause dur="0.4"/> this pattern and not everyone else <pause dur="1.1"/> so why is it that a particular age group should read a single column faster <pause dur="0.3"/> than <pause dur="0.5"/> than everyone else <pause dur="0.2"/> basically <pause dur="0.4"/> so everyone else didn't show a difference between <pause dur="0.3"/> everyone else being the older people <pause dur="0.8"/> didn't show a difference between three columns and a single column <pause dur="0.8"/> but eighteen to <trunc>two</trunc> twenty-four year olds did <pause dur="1.5"/> i've only had <pause dur="0.3"/> i've i've made one guess at this but i i've <pause dur="1.2"/> you're eighteen to twenty-four year olds aren't you <pause dur="0.7"/> mostly <pause dur="0.9"/> does anyone squeeze out the top </u><pause dur="2.5"/> <u who="sm1269" trans="pause"> so what's your guess </u><pause dur="0.4"/> <u who="nf1263" trans="pause"> my guess is that they were more used to reading <pause dur="0.5"/> web pages <pause dur="0.2"/> and that <pause dur="0.2"/> the <pause dur="0.6"/> the text could have looked pretty similar to that <pause dur="0.3"/> and not in <pause dur="0.2"/> three columns </u><u who="sm1270" trans="latching"> were they eighteen to twenty-four year olds </u><u who="nf1263" trans="latching"> <trunc>eigh</trunc> twenty-four four year olds were more used to than the

older people <pause dur="0.3"/> yeah <pause dur="0.3"/> and so it was kind of a </u><u who="sm1270" trans="overlap"> well </u><u who="nf1263" trans="overlap"> <trunc>familar</trunc> familiarity <pause dur="0.2"/> thing </u><pause dur="1.1"/> <u who="sm1270" trans="pause"> and they read less newspapers </u><pause dur="0.9"/> <u who="nf1263" trans="pause"> yeah <trunc>d</trunc> if it if it <pause dur="0.3"/> does generalize from print yeah you would think that the column thing would come out yeah <pause dur="1.4"/> it <pause dur="0.2"/> it <pause dur="0.3"/> <trunc>sligh</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> gets slightly more <pause dur="1.0"/> complicated # <pause dur="0.2"/> no i haven't put it on an overhead <pause dur="0.5"/> but if you <pause dur="2.1"/> if you also what i did was to divide the group into <pause dur="0.2"/> faster and slower readers basically just because you've got the times and looked at whether there were differences <pause dur="0.6"/> # there <pause dur="0.3"/> make sure i get this right 'cause it's complicated <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="1.4"/> faster readers were showing although generally there were no differences in comprehension faster readers were <pause dur="1.1"/> showing better comprehension when they were reading the three columns <pause dur="2.3"/> so <trunc>the</trunc> there's two funny things happening here there's an age differential <pause dur="0.5"/> and faster readers seem to be <pause dur="0.6"/> showing something a bit different to slower readers as well <pause dur="0.8"/> # now those were sort of indications and i i just put them in now because

they did # feed in to what i went on to do after that <pause dur="0.4"/> but just to conclude this part before moving on to the second case study <pause dur="1.1"/> i would say that these together have suggested that <pause dur="0.4"/> longer line lengths may be okay on screen there is this problem that people are definitely saying <pause dur="0.5"/> well i don't think it's easier to read <pause dur="0.4"/> but they are reading them fairly fast and they don't apparently <trunc>ap</trunc> <pause dur="0.3"/> be <pause dur="0.5"/> reading them without taking in what they read because they appear to be able to <pause dur="0.4"/> to answer questions <pause dur="0.7"/> however my second point there may be different levels of comprehension <pause dur="0.3"/> i don't think what i <trunc>wa</trunc> <pause dur="0.4"/> the way i was measuring comprehension was particularly sensitive <pause dur="0.5"/> so my feeling is that <pause dur="0.6"/> maybe <pause dur="0.6"/> # with a long line length there's a possibility that <pause dur="0.3"/> they're they're skimming it because it's rather uncomfortable but i can't pick that up because of the way i'm testing it <pause dur="1.3"/> and i'm suggesting maybe different reading patterns according to age or according to how fast you read sort of from the last

results there <pause dur="0.7"/> but what seems to be absolutely certain is that we can't say we've done all this research in print let's use those results <pause dur="0.3"/> we don't know what the optimum line length is for reading from screen <pause dur="0.4"/> my research hasn't shown it but my research has questioned <pause dur="0.4"/> that <pause dur="0.3"/> fifty-five characters or seventy characters the sort of thing that that comes out of print is the right line length for screen <pause dur="0.6"/> so we shouldn't rely on that <pause dur="1.1"/>

# but the reason to go on with the next <trunc>s</trunc> sort of series of studies was <pause dur="0.6"/> <trunc>c</trunc> i suppose my uncomfortableness with this one-hundred characters per line and and <trunc>reco</trunc> and recommending that <pause dur="0.3"/> and also <pause dur="0.2"/> other people being uncomfortable <pause dur="0.8"/> other colleagues <pause dur="0.4"/> so my thoughts were <pause dur="0.4"/> that <pause dur="4.0"/> long line lengths <pause dur="0.6"/> can be read as far <pause dur="0.4"/> can be read as fast but they're perhaps that we definitely not perceived as easy to read so perhaps there is a problem with comprehension that's really just summarizing already <pause dur="0.5"/> and perhaps there's something happening <pause dur="0.5"/> with <pause dur="0.3"/> faster reading <pause dur="0.2"/>

because we're finding some sort of differences there <pause dur="1.4"/> so <pause dur="1.9"/> what i went on to do was to <pause dur="0.7"/> essentially look at different reading rates so <pause dur="0.2"/> to get people to first of all read at their normal speed <pause dur="0.5"/> and then to <pause dur="0.2"/> try and speed them up <pause dur="0.3"/> # this is the fast reading rate <pause dur="0.7"/> and the way that we did that was essentially to train people to read faster than they do normally <pause dur="0.4"/> so we're not trying to get everyone to a certain reading speed but we tried to get people <pause dur="0.3"/> to a speed that was twice as fast as they normally read <pause dur="1.2"/> so <pause dur="0.2"/> get them to read something and then you say okay try reading the next document faster than that and you see how fast they read it <pause dur="0.3"/> and then say okay well try reading a bit faster than that if they haven't got up to <pause dur="0.5"/> twice the speed <pause dur="0.6"/> and what we found <pause dur="0.3"/> perhaps not too surprising it is very difficult to read at twice the speed <pause dur="0.4"/> that you normally read at <pause dur="0.3"/> if you're still trying to take in <pause dur="0.2"/> what you're reading <pause dur="0.5"/> so we actually stopped at <pause dur="0.2"/> allowing people to read <pause dur="0.8"/> at

seventy seventy per cent faster not twice as fast <pause dur="0.3"/> sounds like it's more <pause dur="0.2"/> but they wouldn't have to speed up quite as much as that <pause dur="1.5"/> # still interested in line lengths 'cause i had some sort of idea that different line lengths might be <pause dur="0.5"/> more useful at different speeds and maybe it's handy to have a long line length when you read fast but it's not when you're reading at a normal speed something like that <pause dur="1.3"/> but because i thought well this comprehension thing isn't really working <pause dur="0.2"/> that i set out to measure comprehension in a different way <pause dur="0.6"/> and <pause dur="0.2"/> to try and to tease out perhaps different things that might be <pause dur="0.4"/> lost <pause dur="0.2"/> when you read fast <pause dur="0.5"/> so there were various different types of questions <pause dur="0.9"/> one referring to the title one to a main idea <pause dur="0.2"/> and i'll show you what those are it's probably <pause dur="0.4"/> easier than # <pause dur="1.0"/> course you don't know what the text is all about so this is <pause dur="0.2"/> slightly abstract here <pause dur="0.7"/> # multiple choice questions which <pause dur="0.2"/> believe me are incredibly hard to set because fair enough you can

do the right answer <pause dur="0.2"/> but <pause dur="0.3"/> there's a real problem in getting <pause dur="0.6"/> two alternatives that are <pause dur="0.6"/> vaguely plausible <pause dur="0.2"/> so essentially these <pause dur="0.2"/> these two alternatives that are wrong have come from somewhere in the document <pause dur="0.4"/> so that people might be fooled by them <pause dur="0.8"/> so this was a document all about Monaco and <pause dur="0.2"/> casinos and stuff like that <pause dur="0.3"/> so you there's a <trunc>qu</trunc> one question which says which is the best title which <trunc>i</trunc> which is best fits the text <pause dur="0.3"/> so you've got to have got a sort of overview of what you've read to be able to answer that 'cause it doesn't exist within the document <pause dur="1.3"/> then there's a question that's a main idea so what the sort of gist is of the document <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> and <pause dur="0.2"/> Monaco is either dedicated to the principle of fabulous excess motor sport or strength in the continuity of the monarchy <pause dur="0.5"/> course you might be able to answer these without reading <pause dur="0.6"/> there's always a danger without reading the document <pause dur="1.2"/> structure question <pause dur="0.2"/> that's that's an important one because it came out very very badly <pause dur="0.4"/> and

this is actually just asking the question as to <pause dur="0.3"/> what happened when or what happened before something else <pause dur="0.4"/> so what you've got to remember is the sequence of events in something that you've read <pause dur="0.5"/> so who does the autor author interview just before blah blah blah <pause dur="0.3"/> so these three people would have come up somewhere in that document <pause dur="1.2"/> then you've got incidental sort of detailed questions <trunc>h</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> # with some a number in that case <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> and there was also one that didn't refer to a number <pause dur="0.3"/> and then a main factual question which wasn't the main idea but was still something fairly major <pause dur="0.6"/> and then finally <pause dur="0.4"/> this is remembering precise wording so you have to say whether this precise wording was in something that you've read <pause dur="1.1"/> and the ones that weren't in there were taken from another part of the document so you've got the same writing style <pause dur="0.8"/> so what i hoped to find was well i thought this must be really sensitive so maybe people'll lose some of these things they <trunc>wi</trunc> won't be able

to answer some of them but they will be able to answer others <pause dur="3.3"/> right <pause dur="0.3"/> so <pause dur="0.4"/> still found that short line lengths are read slower <pause dur="0.2"/> this had <pause dur="0.3"/> twenty-five fifty-five and one-hundred again so your very short <pause dur="0.3"/> your medium line length and your long line length <pause dur="0.7"/> but the long ones <pause dur="0.3"/> the long line length wasn't coming out much much better it was the same as the medium line length so i'm losing <pause dur="0.2"/> my <pause dur="0.7"/> my good effect of a long line length it just doesn't seem to be coming out in the same way as it did in the first experiment <pause dur="1.7"/> but there were differences in comprehension <pause dur="0.2"/> which was good because that was something that i hadn't found before so this was more sensitive <pause dur="3.0"/> and <pause dur="0.2"/> it's the middling line length that essentially is coming out <pause dur="0.2"/> better <pause dur="0.3"/> so comprehension's better <pause dur="0.4"/> and those line lengths are read reasonably fast <pause dur="2.8"/> # <pause dur="1.5"/> when people read fast as you might expect their comprehension is poorer <pause dur="0.3"/> so that that <pause dur="0.5"/> you want to find that because it makes sure that what you're you actually got a sensitive

measuring instrument that was found <pause dur="0.6"/> and people recall less detail rather than the main facts so what goes is the detail <pause dur="0.6"/> but the one that i sort of <pause dur="0.2"/> mentioned just now <pause dur="0.4"/> for some reason <pause dur="0.2"/> people had <pause dur="0.2"/> much more difficulty with remembering where something came within the text the structure question <pause dur="0.6"/> than they did any of the other questions and that's regardless of how fast or or slow they were reading <pause dur="1.3"/> and <pause dur="0.5"/> again giving a stab at why this might happen <pause dur="0.5"/> all of this was scrolling text and i think i've referred to this before what you lose in scrolling text that you have in books <pause dur="0.5"/> is any <pause dur="0.7"/> cue to where something sits on a page so whereas in a book you might think oh yes that idea came on <pause dur="0.5"/> # a left page near the top <pause dur="0.4"/> you haven't got that <pause dur="0.2"/> sort of indication when you've got <pause dur="0.3"/> text that you just scroll through <pause dur="0.4"/> and maybe that somehow influences you recalling <pause dur="0.3"/> where certain things happened within the text <pause dur="0.4"/> that's one of those guesses that i haven't <pause dur="0.2"/> got any <trunc>f</trunc> more evidence for <pause dur="1.4"/> and the final

thing that i was trying to do by looking at <pause dur="0.2"/> how people scrolled was to say <pause dur="0.4"/> well is there <pause dur="0.7"/> are there good ways of scrolling through text that either speed us up <pause dur="0.2"/> so we can read faster if we want to do that 'cause maybe we want to just skim read <pause dur="0.3"/> or are there <pause dur="1.1"/> other <pause dur="0.3"/> maybe the same methods or different methods that enable us to understand better <pause dur="0.7"/> so i was looking for <pause dur="0.8"/> the characteristics of effective readers an effective reader might be a fast reader <pause dur="0.3"/> or an effective reader might be someone that's <pause dur="0.2"/> good at understanding what they've read <pause dur="0.3"/> and maybe depending on the task you have <pause dur="0.5"/> different different demands maybe you want to read quickly or maybe you want to <pause dur="0.4"/> to <pause dur="0.2"/> study it more and get more out of it <pause dur="1.0"/> and there are different scrolling patterns that do match up but they are different

depending on whether you want to read fast or understand <pause dur="0.7"/> i've just got the fast one here <pause dur="0.6"/> so <pause dur="0.2"/> those people that are reading fast were <pause dur="0.3"/> spending less time between scrolling <pause dur="0.2"/> so they were also making only a few scrolling movements <pause dur="0.2"/> so essentially they weren't <pause dur="0.2"/> pausing for very long to read <pause dur="0.3"/> they were keeping the text <pause dur="0.5"/> moving <pause dur="0.5"/> and that speeds up reading <pause dur="0.6"/> whereas people that showed better comprehension were <pause dur="0.4"/> sort of doing the opposite they were pausing for longer <pause dur="0.4"/> in between scrolling <pause dur="1.1"/> so <pause dur="0.2"/> what that might mean if i carry on and do some research is that <pause dur="0.2"/> you can manipulate how people scroll through text and see whether it does improve <pause dur="0.6"/> either their speed of reading <pause dur="0.5"/> or <pause dur="0.9"/> their <pause dur="0.4"/> comprehension <pause dur="0.3"/> because this doesn't do that that this just said <pause dur="0.3"/> says those readers that did that <pause dur="0.2"/> came out well <pause dur="0.2"/> it doesn't

say that if <pause dur="0.2"/> if i ask you to do that <pause dur="0.2"/> then <pause dur="0.2"/> then <pause dur="0.2"/> you'll <pause dur="0.2"/> you'll come out well from that <pause dur="1.3"/> so in conclusion my always my conclusions are there's room for lots lots more research and <pause dur="0.5"/> what i can say definitely from this and it's probably the only thing <pause dur="0.4"/> is that i you cannot predict from <pause dur="0.6"/> print legibility research <pause dur="0.2"/> how people are going to read from screen <pause dur="0.8"/> and <pause dur="0.6"/> that <pause dur="0.3"/> ought to be obvious because we've got a more interactive way of reading we can manipulate the text in different ways <pause dur="0.5"/> but there seems to be something a bit more <pause dur="0.9"/> perhaps basic in relation to the lengths of lines that <pause dur="0.3"/> that affects how we read from screen <pause dur="1.8"/> okay