View in EDS

Designing a novel typeface for mobile devices: reflections on a mixed-methods approach using quantitative and qualitative data in the lab and in the wild.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Designing a novel typeface for mobile devices: reflections on a mixed-methods approach using quantitative and qualitative data in the lab and in the wild.
Authors: Gleissl, Barbara1 (AUTHOR), Haslbeck, Andreas1 (AUTHOR) andreas.haslbeck@his-e.de, Hoesl, Axel1 (AUTHOR), Liu, Mengdi2 (AUTHOR)
Source: Cognition, Technology & Work. Jun2025, Vol. 27 Issue 1, p337-357. 21p.
Subjects: Type design, Fonts & typefaces, Aesthetics, Concerts, Eye tracking
Abstract: This paper reports the development and evaluation studies of a novel typeface, which requires various levels of analysis especially when considering a final industry level deployment. To inform approaches and choices, we report on a set of eight studies that were conducted while concerting an effort to guide the development of a novel typeface for mobile devices within a user-centered design paradigm. Our mixed-methods approach was separated into four distinct research phases: (1) pre-studies, (2) the evaluation of multiple design alternatives, (3) the empirical determination of dedicated typographical characteristics and (4) the investigation of the introduction of the favored alternative. In triangulating across various methods, we employed quantitative (e.g. via eye-tracking) and qualitative (e.g. via surveys) measures to estimate behavioral (reading performance) and attitudinal (aesthetic preference) data. We collected it in controlled conditions (laboratory environment) as well as in-the-wild (diary study). To provide methodological guidance, we not only report on the individual results and insights extracted from our conducted studies, but also reflect on our overall approach while discussing the benefits and shortcomings of our selected methods individually as well as in combination and their relevance for our multi-stage research setup. The outcome of this development process was a new typeface which provided the same objective reading performance compared to its predecessor, while regarding subjective user approval it outperformed the existing typeface. Highlights End-to-end report: 4 research phases covering 8 user studies (totaling 293 participants) Rating scale development: creation of 4 unique rating scales Reflections on the process and results after launch to millions of devices [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Cognition, Technology & Work is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Engineering Source
Description
Abstract:This paper reports the development and evaluation studies of a novel typeface, which requires various levels of analysis especially when considering a final industry level deployment. To inform approaches and choices, we report on a set of eight studies that were conducted while concerting an effort to guide the development of a novel typeface for mobile devices within a user-centered design paradigm. Our mixed-methods approach was separated into four distinct research phases: (1) pre-studies, (2) the evaluation of multiple design alternatives, (3) the empirical determination of dedicated typographical characteristics and (4) the investigation of the introduction of the favored alternative. In triangulating across various methods, we employed quantitative (e.g. via eye-tracking) and qualitative (e.g. via surveys) measures to estimate behavioral (reading performance) and attitudinal (aesthetic preference) data. We collected it in controlled conditions (laboratory environment) as well as in-the-wild (diary study). To provide methodological guidance, we not only report on the individual results and insights extracted from our conducted studies, but also reflect on our overall approach while discussing the benefits and shortcomings of our selected methods individually as well as in combination and their relevance for our multi-stage research setup. The outcome of this development process was a new typeface which provided the same objective reading performance compared to its predecessor, while regarding subjective user approval it outperformed the existing typeface. Highlights End-to-end report: 4 research phases covering 8 user studies (totaling 293 participants) Rating scale development: creation of 4 unique rating scales Reflections on the process and results after launch to millions of devices [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:14355558
DOI:10.1007/s10111-025-00800-1