About HFI   Certification   Tools   Services   Training   Free Resources   Media Room  
               
 Site MapUser Experience for a Better World   
Human Factors International Home
Free Resources
Bookmark and Share

UI Design Newsletter – May, 2000

In This Issue

Screen Resolution

Can users read faster when using monitors that are set at higher resolutions?

Screen Resolution
Effects of image polarity on VDT task performance, Snyder, H.L., Decker, J.J., Lloyd, C.J.C., and Dye, C., Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 34th Annual Meeting, 1447-1451 (1990).

Two of the variables most closely related to readability seem to be:

  1. display polarity, where Snyder, et.al. (1990) reported that black characters on a white background elicits faster reading performance than white characters on a black background, and
  2. screen resolution.

Although screen resolution is known to be an important factor, the exact relationship between display resolution and readability is not yet clear.

Effects of display resolution on visual performance, Ziefle, M., Human Factors, 40(4), 555-568, (1998).

Martha Ziefle at the Institute of Psychology in Germany conducted two studies where she tried to better understand the relationship between screen resolution and reading performance.

Experiment 1

Ziefle investigated the effects on reading performance using hardcopy (measured at 255 dots per inch or "dpi") and two resolutions of monitors, 1664x1200 pixels (120 dpi) vs. 832x600 pixels (60 dpi). She measured reading speed and proofreading accuracy.

Participants read from the same 19-inch monitor using black characters on light background. The subjects viewed the material from a distance of 20 inches (50 cm).

In this well-controlled study, reading from hard copy was reliably faster (200 wpm vs.180 wpm) and elicited reliably greater proofreading accuracy than reading from the monitors. Also, 80% of the participants preferred reading from paper, and the remaining 20% preferred the higher resolution screen. However, the high-resolution screen did not elicit better reading performance than the low-resolution screen.

Experiment 2

The main difference between the second experiment and the first was the task that the participants performed. In the second experiment, they performed a continuous visual search task rather than a proofreading task. She compared their performance on the following:

High resolution screen: 1024x768 pixels (measured at 89 dpi), and Low resolution screen: 720x540 pixels (measured at 62 dpi).

Overall, she found that participants searched reliably faster using the high-resolution display. After 30 minutes using the low resolution screen, the subjects began to:

  1. search slower,
  2. make more errors, and
  3. have more and longer fixations.

Her two studies suggest that one of the main contributors to slower reading performance, at least after 30 minutes, could be the resolution of the characters being read. Based on the fact that the lower resolution screen produced more and longer fixations, the slower reading may come from users requiring more time (per word or phrase) in perceiving the characters.

Comment on this article
* Name
Company Name
* Email Address
* Please enter your comment here
The HFI User Interface Design Update Newsletter discusses the latest research in the field of usability. To learn more about the practical application of recent usability research and how it impacts user-centered design, we invite you to attend our Putting Research into Practice course.
© 1996-2012 Human Factors International, Inc. All rights reserved  |  Privacy Policy  |   rss feed biber hapıbiber hapı