What the Font! The Role of Handwritten Font in Course Interest, Student Inference, and Learning Outcome

References

• Ackerman, D. S., & Gross, B. L. (2021). Synchronous online discussion board as a primary mode of delivering marketing education: Responding to the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. Marketing Education Review, 31(4), 284–293. doi:10.1080/10528008.2021.1893752
   Google Scholar
• Ames, D. R., & Iyengar, S. S. (2005). Appraising the unusual: Framing effects and moderators of uniqueness-seeking and social projection. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41(3), 271–282. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2004.07.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arndt, A. D., Ford, J. B., Babin, B. J., & Luong, V. (2022). Collecting samples from online services: How to use screeners to improve data quality. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 39(1), 117–133. doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2021.05.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Babad, E. (2001). Students’ course selection: Differential considerations for first and last course. Research in Higher Education, 42(4), 469–492. doi:10.1023/A:1011058926613
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrios, M., Villarroya, A., Borrego, A., & Ollé, C. (2011). Response rates and data quality in web and mail surveys administered to PhD holders. Social Science Computer Review, 29(2), 208–220. doi:10.1177/0894439310368031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernard, M., Lida, B., Riley, S., Hackler, T., & Janzen, K. (2002). A comparison of popular online fonts: Which size and type is best. Usability News, 4(1).
   Google Scholar
• Berger, J. (2023). Magic words: What to say to get your way. New York: Narrated by K. Nobbs. Harper Audio. Audiobook.
   Google Scholar
• Beyon, J., & Cox-Boyd, C. (2020). The influence of font type and color on online information recall. North American Journal of Psychology, 22(1), 13–26.
   Google Scholar
• Berezan, O., Krishen, A. S., & Garcera, S. (2022). Back to the basics: Handwritten journaling, Student engagement, and Bloom’s learning outcomes. Journal of Marketing Education, 45(1), 5–17. doi:10.1177/02734753221075557
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bradley hand ITC font family. (2022, March 30). Font Library. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/typography/font-list/bradley-hand-itc
   Google Scholar
• Briggs, E., & Janakiraman, N. (2017). Slogan recall effects on marketplace behaviors: The roles of external search and brand assessment. Journal of Business Research, 80, 98–105. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.07.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon’s mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(1), 3–5. doi:10.1177/1745691610393980
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castelo, N., Fitz, N., Schmitt, B., & Sarvary, M. (2016). Cyborg consumers: When human enhancement technologies are dehumanizing. In P. Moreau & S. Puntoni (Eds.), 2016. NA - Advances in Consumer Research, Berlin, Germany (Vol. 44, pp. 42–47). Duluth, MN: Association for Consumer Research. https://www.acrwebsite.org/assets/PDFs/Proceedings/2016vol44.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Chen, B., Chang, Y. H., Ouyang, F., & Zhou, W. (2018). Fostering student engagement in online discussion through social learning analytics. The Internet and Higher Education, 37, 21–30. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.12.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chu, X., Tok, D., Zhou, X., and Chen, X. (2023). How companies use typeface design to engage consumers in charitable activities. Psychology and Marketing, 40(1), 107–123. doi:10.1002/mar.21732
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clayson, D. E. (1999). Students’ evaluation of teaching effectiveness: Some implications of stability. Journal of Marketing Education, 21(1), 68–75. doi:10.1177/0273475399211009
   Google Scholar
• Doyle, J. R., & Bottomley, P. A. (2004). Font appropriateness and brand choice. Journal of Business Research, 57(8), 873–880. doi:10.1016/S0148-2963(02)00487-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duval, S. (1976). Conformity on a visual task as a function of personal novelty on attitudinal dimensions and being reminded of the object status of self. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 12(1), 87–98. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(76)90088-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Easley, R. W., Madden, C. S., & Dunn, M. G. (2000). Conducting marketing science: The role of replication in the research process. Journal of Business Research, 48(1), 83–92. doi:10.1016/S0148-2963(98)00079-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evanschitzky, H., & Armstrong, J. S. (2013). Research with in-built replications: Comment and further suggestions for replication research. Journal of Business Research, 66(9), 1406–1408. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.05.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evanschitzky, H., Baumgarth, C., Hubbard, R., & Armstrong, J. S. (2007). Replication research’s disturbing trend. Journal of Business Research, 60(4), 411–415. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.12.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Folkes, V., & Matta, S. (2004). The effect of package shape on consumers’ judgments of product volume: Attention as a mental contaminant. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(2), 390–401. doi:10.1086/422117
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Francescucci, A., & Rohani, L. (2019). Exclusively synchronous online (VIRI) learning: The impact on student performance and engagement outcomes. Journal of Marketing Education, 41(1), 60–69. doi:10.1177/0273475318818864
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frippiat, D., Marquis, N., & Wiles-Portier, E. (2010). Web surveys in the social sciences: An overview. Population (English Edition), 65(2), 285–311. doi:10.3917/pope.1002.0285
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Go, E., & Sundar, S. S. (2019). Humanizing chatbots: The effects of visual, identity and conversational cues on humanness perceptions. Computers in Human Behavior, 97, 304–316. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghufron, M. A., & Rosyida, F. (2018). The role of Grammarly in assessing English as a foreign language (EFL) writing. Lingua Cultura, 12(4), 395–403. doi:10.21512/lc.v12i4.4582
   Google Scholar
• Grohmann, B., Giese, J. L., & Parkman, I. D. (2013). Using type font characteristics to communicate brand personality of new brands. Journal of Brand Management, 20(5), 389–403. doi:10.1057/bm.2012.23
   Google Scholar
• Hall, H. (2018). The marketisation of higher education: Symptoms, controversies, trends. Ekonomia I Prawo Economics and Law, 17(1), 33–42. doi:10.12775/EiP.2018.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• He, Y., Alexander, J. F., Nikolov, A., & Chen, R. A. (2022). I was told there would be no math: Marketing students’ misconceptions of the career field impede enrollment interest in quantitative courses. Marketing Education Review, 33(3), 178–189. doi:10.1080/10528008.2022.2067778
   Google Scholar
• Henderson, P. W., Giese, J. L., & Cote, J. A. (2004). Impression management using typeface design. Journal of Marketing, 68(4), 60–72. doi:10.1509/jmkg.68.4.60.42736
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang, H., & Liu, S.Q. (2020). Donate to help combat COVID-19! How typeface affects the effectiveness of CSR marketing. IJCHM, 32(10), 3315–3333. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-05-2020-0462
   Google Scholar
• Hunter, J. E. (2001). The desperate need for replications. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(1), 149–158. doi:10.1086/321953
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hwang, Y., Gao, Y., Mattila, A., and Wang, P. (2023). Optimizing Handwritten Font Style to Connect With Customers. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 64(3), 381–395. 10.1177/19389655221102389
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGuire, W. J. (1984). Search for the self: Going beyond self-esteem and the reactive self. Personality and the Prediction of Behavior, 73(120), 121–127.
   Google Scholar
• Izadi, A., & Patrick, V. M. (2020). The power of the pen: Handwritten fonts promote haptic engagement. Psychology & Marketing, 37(8), 1082–1100. doi:10.1002/mar.21318
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jin, H. S. (2003). Compounding consumer interest: Effects of advertising campaign publicity on the ability to recall subsequent advertisements. Journal of Advertising, 32(4), 29–41. doi:10.1080/00913367.2003.10639145
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Juni, S., & Gross, J. S. (2008). Emotional and persuasive perception of fonts. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 106(1), 35–42. doi:10.2466/pms.106.1.35-42
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kees, J., Berry, C., Burton, S., & Sheehan, K. (2017). An analysis of data quality: Professional panels, student subject pools, and Amazon’s mechanical Turk. Journal of Advertising, 46(1), 141–155. doi:10.1080/00913367.2016.1269304
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kordel, R. (2008). Information presentation for effective e-learning. Educause Quarterly, 31(4), 10–12.
   Google Scholar
• Kulkarni, G., & Vinuales, G. (2020). The importance of course title and student perceived value of a course to employers in motivating students to enroll in quantitative marketing courses. Marketing Education Review, 30(4), 225–235. doi:10.1080/10528008.2020.1794900
   Google Scholar
• Lancellotti, M., & Thomas, S. (2009). To take or not to take: Effects of motivation, self-efficacy, and class-related factors on course attitudes. Marketing Education Review, 19(2), 35–47. doi:10.1080/10528008.2009.11489073
   Google Scholar
• Liu, S. Q., Choi, S., & Mattila, A. S. (2019). Love is in the menu: Leveraging healthy restaurant brands with handwritten typeface. Journal of Business Research, 98, 289–298. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.02.022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynn, M., & Snyder, C. R. (2002). Uniqueness seeking. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 395–410). London: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Making design accessible: Fonts, color contrast, and alt text. (n.d.). University of North Carolina Greenboro. https://accessibility.uncg.edu/getting-started-with-accessibility/accessible-design/
   Google Scholar
• Maringe, F. (2006). University and course choice: Implications for positioning, recruitment and marketing. International Journal of Educational Management, 20(6), 466–479. doi:10.1108/09513540610683711
   Google Scholar
• Mendini, M., & Peter, P. C. (2019). Research note: The role of smart versus traditional classrooms on students’ engagement. Marketing Education Review, 29(1), 17–23. doi:10.1080/10528008.2018.1532301
   Google Scholar
• Minton, E. A., & Krszjzaniek, E. J. (2021). Enhancing marketing research learning outcomes using the outdoors. Marketing Education Review, 31(2), 93–98. doi:10.1080/10528008.2020.1802293
   Google Scholar
• Mourey, J. A., Markley, M. M., & Koernig, S. K. (2022). Dazzling descriptions and tantalizing titles: How simple versus complex course information influences course selection. Journal of Marketing Education, 44(1), 100–112. doi:10.1177/02734753211017625
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norman, D., & Nielsen, J. (n.d.). The definition of user experience. Accessed 2 September, 2023. http://www.nngroup.com/about/userexperience.html
   Google Scholar
• Novemsky, N., Dhar, R., Schwarz, N., & Simonson, I. (2007). Preference fluency in choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(3), 347–356. doi:10.1509/jmkr.44.3.347
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paswan, A. K., & Young, J. A. (2002). Student evaluation of instructor: A nomological investigation using structural equation modeling. Journal of Marketing Education, 24(3), 193–202. doi:10.1177/0273475302238042
   Google Scholar
• Pechmann, C., & Stewart, D. W. (1990). The effects of comparative advertising on attention, memory, and purchase intentions. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(2), 180–191. doi:10.1086/208548
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poffenberger, A. T., & Franken, R. B. (1923). A study of the appropriateness of type faces. Journal of Applied Psychology, 7(4), 312. doi:10.1037/h0071591
   Google Scholar
• Pocheptsova, A., Labroo, A. A., & Dhar, R. (2010). Making products feel special: When metacognitive difficulty enhances evaluation. Journal of Marketing Research, 47(6), 1059–1069. doi:10.1509/jmkr.47.6.1059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pride, W. M., & Ferrell, O. C. (2020). Marketing. Boston, MA: Cengage.
   Google Scholar
• Purinton, E. F., & Burke, M. M. (2020). Engaging online students: Using a multisensory exercise for deeper, active learning. Marketing Education Review, 30(1), 29–42. doi:10.1080/10528008.2019.1677478
   Google Scholar
• Ratner, R. K., & Kahn, B. E. (2002). The impact of private versus public consumption on variety-seeking behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(2), 246–257. doi:10.1086/341574
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rinaldo, S. B., Tapp, S., & Laverie, D. A. (2011). Learning by tweeting: Using twitter as a pedagogical tool. Journal of Marketing Education, 33(2), 193–203. doi:10.1177/0273475311410852
   Google Scholar
• Schiefele, U., & Krapp, A. (1996). Topic interest and free recall of expository text. Learning and Individual Differences, 8(2), 141–160. doi:10.1016/S1041-6080(96)90030-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). The effect of reader purpose on interest and recall. Journal of Reading Behavior, 26(1), 1–18. doi:10.1080/10862969409547834
   Google Scholar
• Schroll, R., Schnurr, B., Grewal, D., Johar, G., & Aggarwal, P. (2018). Humanizing products with handwritten typefaces. Journal of Consumer Research, 45(3), 648–672. doi:10.1093/jcr/ucy014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott, J. I., & Beuk, F. (2020). Sales education for engineering students: What drives interest and choice? Journal of Marketing Education, 42(3), 324–338. doi:10.1177/0273475320906427
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaikh, A. D., Chaparro, B. S., & Fox, D. (2006). Perception of fonts: Perceived personality traits and uses. Usability News, 8(1), 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Snyder, C. R., & Fromkin, H. L. (1980). Uniqueness: The human pursuit of difference. New York, NY: Plenum.
   Google Scholar
• Spikermann, E., & Ginger, E. M. (2003). Stop counting sheep and find out how type works. Berkeley, CA: Peachpit.
   Google Scholar
• Soutar, G. N., & Turner, J. P. (2002). Students’ preferences for university: A conjoint analysis. International Journal of Educational Management, 16(1), 40–45. doi:10.1108/09513540210415523
   Google Scholar
• Stankevich, A. (2017). Explaining the consumer decision-making process: Critical literature review. Journal of International Business Research and Marketing, 2(6), 7–14. doi:10.18775/jibrm.1849-8558.2015.26.3001
   Google Scholar
• Steiner, S. D., & Hyman, M. R. (2010). Improving the student experience: Allowing students enrolled in a required course to select online or face-to-face instruction. Marketing Education Review, 20(1), 29–34. doi:10.2753/MER1052-8008200105
   Google Scholar
• Tian, K. T., Bearden, W. O., & Hunter, G. L. (2001). Consumers’ need for uniqueness: Scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(1), 50–66. doi:10.1086/321947
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toncar, M. F., & Munch, J. M. (2010). Meaningful replication: When is a replication no longer a replication? A rejoinder to Stella and Adam (2008). Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice, 18(1), 71–80. doi:10.2753/MTP1069-6679180105
   Google Scholar
• Tsai, C. I., & McGill, A. L. (2011). No pain, no gain? How fluency and construal level affect consumer confidence. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(5), 807–821. doi:10.1086/655855
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuke, H. (2021, October 25). Making Design Accessible: Fonts, Color Contrast, and Alt Text. Scope = Equality for Disabled People. https://business.scope.org.uk/article/accessibility-screen-readers-special-characters-and-unicode-symbols/
   Google Scholar
• Uanhoro, J., & Young, S. S. C. (2022). Investigation of the effect of badges in the online homework system for undergraduate general physics course. Education Sciences, 12(3), 1–13. doi:10.3390/educsci12030217
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, G. F. (2020). A guide to understanding what makes a typeface accessible. The Readability Group. https://medium.com/the-readability-group/a-guide-to-understanding-what-makes-a-typeface-accessible-and-how-to-make-informed-decisions-9e5c0b9040a0
   Google Scholar
• Wu, R., Han, X., & Kardes, F. R. (2021). Special fonts: The competing roles of difficulty and uniqueness in consumer inference. Psychology & Marketing, 38(1), 86–100. doi:10.1002/mar.21414
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young, M. R. (2014). Integrating quality matters into hybrid course design: A principles of marketing case study. Journal of Marketing Education, 36(3), 233–243. doi:10.1177/0273475314547821
   Google Scholar
• Yuksel, M., Smith, A. N., Smith, R. S., Bicen, P., Wilson, E. J., & Weiner, J. (2021). Student interest in client-sponsored projects: The quest for engagement in marketing research courses. Journal of Marketing Education, 43(3), 354–370. doi:10.1177/0273475321996797
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zavaleta Bernuy, A., Han, Z., Shaikh, H., Zheng, Q. Y., Lim, L. A., Rafferty, A. … Williams, J. J. (2022, March). How can email interventions increase students’ completion of online homework? A case study using A/B comparisons. In LAK22: 12th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference, Online (pp. 107–118). doi:10.1145/3506860.3506874
   Google Scholar