Enhancement of peripheral letter recognition by typographic features

References

• Brown B. Reading performance in low vision patients: relation to contrast and contrast sensitivity. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1981;58:218.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rubin GS, Legge GE. Psychophysics of reading. VI. The role of contrast in low vision. Vis Res 1989;29:79–91.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knoblauch K, Arditi A, Szlyk J. Effects of chromatic and luminance contrast on reading. J Optic Soc Am Part A. Optics Image Sci 1991;8(2): 428–439.
   Google Scholar
• Raasch TW, Rubin GS. Reading with low vision. J Am Optom Assoc 1993; 64(1):15–18.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Legge GE, Rubin GS, Pelli DG, Schleske MM. Psychophysics of reading. II. Low vision. Vision Res 1985;25:253–266.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rumney NJ. Using visual thresholds to establish low vision performance. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1995;15 (Suppl 1):S18–24.
   Google Scholar
• Von Noorden G, Mackensen G. Phenomenology of eccentric fixation. Am J Ophthalmol 1962;53:642–659.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nilsson UL, Frennesson C, Nilsson SE. Location and stability of a newly established eccentric retinal locus suitable for reading, achieved through training of patients with a dense central scotoma. Optom Vis Sci 1998; 75(12):873–878.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Potter MC. Rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP): a method for studying language processing. In: Kieras D, Just M, editors. New Methods in Reading Comprehension Research. Hillsdale: Erlbaum, 1984; 91–118.
   Google Scholar
• Rubin GS, Turano K. Low vision reading with sequential word presentation. Vis Res 1994;34(13): 1723–1733.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• NTIA. ‘Falling Through the Net: The Digital Divide’, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Dept. of Commerce; 1998: see http://www. ntia.doc.gov.
   Google Scholar
• Nie NH, Erbring L. Internet and Society. Stanford Institute for the Quantitative Study of Society; 2000: see http://www.stanford.edu/group/ SIQSS.
   Google Scholar
• Kirschmann A. Die Schriftfrage und das indirekte Sehen. Börsenblatt Dtsch Buchhandel 1911;65:3468–3470.
   Google Scholar
• McLean R. The James and Hudson Manual of Typography. London: James and Hudson, 1980.
   Google Scholar
• Ouaknin M-A. Mysteries of the Alphabet: The Origins of Writing. New York: Abbeville Press, 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Arditi A, Cagenello R, Jacobs B. Letter stroke width, spacing and legibility. OSA-Technical Digest, Series 1, VSIA, 1995; TuC1–4.
   Google Scholar
• Zachrisson B. Studies in the Legibility of Printed Text. Stockholm Series in Educational Psychology 11. Stockholm: Almquist & Wiksell, 1965.
   Google Scholar
• MacKeben M. Sustained focal attention and peripheral letter recognition. Spatial Vision 1999;12/ 1:51–71.
   Google Scholar
• MacKeben M. Typefaces influence peripheral letter recognition and can be optimized for reading with eccentric viewing. In: Stuen C, Arditi A, Horowitz A, Lang MA, Rosenthal B, Seidman KR, editors. Vision Rehabilitation Assessment, Intervention and Outcomes. Selected papers from Vision’99: International Conference on Low Vision, New York, Lighthouse International. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger, 2000; 293–294.
   Google Scholar
• Sloan LL. New test charts for the measurement of visual acuity at far and near distances. Am J Ophthalmol 1959;48:807–813.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strasburger H, Rentschler I, Harvey LO. Cortical magnification theory fails to predict visual recognition. Eur J Neurosci 1994;6:1583–1588.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• MacKeben M, Colenbrander A, Gofen Use your PC to quickly map remaining vision after foveal vision loss. In: Wall M, Wild JM, editors. Perimetry Update 1998/1999. The Hague: Kugler Publications, 1999; 307–316.
   Google Scholar
• Gofen A, MacKeben M. An introduction to accurate display timing for PCs under ‘Windows’. Spatial Vision 1997;10(4):361–368.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Macmillan NA, Creelman CD. Signal Detection Theory: A User’s Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
   Google Scholar
• Loomis JM. A model of character recognition and legibility. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 1990; 16(1):106–120.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tinker MA. Legibility of Print. Ames, IA: Iowa University Press, 1963.
   Google Scholar
• Mansfield JS, Legge GE, Bane MC. Psychophysics of reading XV: font effects in normal and low vision. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1996;37/8: 1492–1501.
   Google Scholar
• Sanocki T. Visual knowledge underlying letter perception: font- specific, schematic tuning. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 1987; 13(2):267–278.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanocki T. Font regularity constraints on the process of letter recognition. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1988;14(3):472–480.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klitz TS, Mansfield JS, Legge GE. Reading speed is affected by font transition. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1995;36(4):S670.
   Google Scholar
• Mansfield JS, Legge GE. From letters to words: the role of lexical inference. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1999; 40(4):S35.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gescheider GA. Psychophysics: Method and Theory. Hillsdale, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum Associates, 1976.
   Google Scholar