Legibility research of highway signage typefaces: A critical review and a potential design-centred approach

References

• Beier, S. 2009. “Typeface Legibility: Towards Defining Familiarity.” PhD Thesis, Royal College of Arts.
   Google Scholar
• Beier, S. 2016. “Letterform Research: An Academic Orphan.” Visible Language (50.2) 64–79.
   Google Scholar
• Beier, S., and K. Larson. 2010. “Design Improvements for Frequently Misrecognized Letters.” Information Design Journal 18 (2): 118–137. doi:https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.18.2.03bei.
   Google Scholar
• Bertucci, A., and R. Crawford. 2015. Best Practice Standards for on-Premise Signs. Bristol, PA: United States Sign Council Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Bullough, J. D. 2017. “Factors Affecting Sign Visibility, Conspicuity and Legibility: Review and Annotated Bibliography.” Interdisciplinary Journal of Signage and Wayfinding 1 (2): 2. doi:https://doi.org/10.15763/ijsw.v1i2.9.
   Google Scholar
• Cai, H., and P. Green. 2009. “Legibility Index for Examining Common Viewing Situations: A New Definition Using Solid Angle.” Leukos 5 (4): 279–295. doi:https://doi.org/10.1582/LEUKOS.2008.05.04.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cai, H., P. A. Green, and J. J. Kim. 2013. “Estimating the legibility of a single letter E viewed at different display angles.” Applied ergonomics 44 (4): 575–587.
   Google Scholar
• Carlson, P. J. 2001. Evaluation of Clearview Alphabet with Microprismatic Retroreflective Sheetings. Report No. FHWA/TX-02/4049-1. Texas, USA: Texas Transportation Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Case, H., J. Michael, G. Mount, and R. Brenner. 1952. “Analysis of Certain Variables Related to Sign Legibility.” Highway Research Board Bulletin 60. Bristol, USA: Highway Research Board.
   Google Scholar
• Chrysler, S., P. Carlson, and G. Hawkins. 2002. Nighttime Legibility of Ground-Mounted Traffic Signs as a Function of Font, Color, and Retroreflective Sheeting Type. Report No. FHWA/TX-03/1796-2. Texas, USA: Texas Transportation Institute, The Texas A&M University System.
   Google Scholar
• Cullen, K. 2012. Design Elements Typography Fundamentals: a Graphic Style Manual for Understanding how Typography Affects Design. Beverly, USA: Rockport Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Dobres, J., S. Chrysler, N. Chahine, B. Wolfe, and B. Reimer. 2017. “Empirical Assessment of the Legibility of the Highway Gothic and Clearview Signage Fonts.” Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2624 (1): 1–8. doi:https://doi.org/10.3141/2624-01.
   Google Scholar
• Finley, D., and J. Wilkinson. 1984. “The Effects of Glare on the Contrast Sensitivity Function.” Human Factors 26 (3): 283–287.
   Google Scholar
• Forbes, T. W. 1972. “Visibility and Legibility of Highway Signs.” In Human Factors in Highway Traffic Safety Research, 95–109. New York: Wiley-Interscience.
   Google Scholar
• Forbes, T. W. 1969. “Factors in Visibility and Legibility of Highway Signs and Markings.” In Visual Factors in Transportation Systems: Proceedings of Spring Meeting, 12–29. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Forbes, T. W., and R. S. Holmes. 1939. Legibility Distances of Highway Destination Signs in Relation to Letter Height, Width, and Reflectorization, Vol. 19, 321–335. Washington, DC: Highway Research Board Proceedings, Highway Research Board.
   Google Scholar
• Forbes, T. W., K. Moscowitz, and G. Morgan. 1951. “A Comparison of Lowercase and Capital Letters for Highway Signs.” In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Meeting of the Highway Research Board, Highway Research Board, 355–373, Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Forbes, T. W., B. B. Saari, W. H. Greenwood, J. G. Goldblatt, and T. E. Hill. 1976. “Luminance and Contrast Requirements for Legibility and Visibility of Highway Signs.” In Transportation Research Record 562, 59–72. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
   Google Scholar
• Frayling, C. 1993. “Research in Art and Design.” In Royal College of Art Research Papers, Vol. 1, 1.
   Google Scholar
• Garvey, P. M., and D. J. Mace. 1996. Changeable Message Sign Visibility. Report No. FHWA-RD-94-077. USA: Federal Highway Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Garvey, P., M. Klena, W. Eie, D. Meeker, and M. Pietrucha. 2015. The Legibility of the Clearview Typeface System versus Standard Highway Alphabets on Negative- and Positive-Contrast Signs. The Thomas D. Larson Pennsylvania Transportation Institute, The Pennsylvania State University.
   Google Scholar
• Garvey, P., M. Pietrucha, and D. Meeker. 1997. “Effects of Font and Capitalization on Legibility of Guide Signs.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1605 (1): 73–79. doi:https://doi.org/10.3141/1605-09.
   Google Scholar
• Garvey, P., A. Zineddin, and M. Pietrucha. 2001. “Letter Legibility for Signs and Other Large-Format Applications.” Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting 45 (18): 1443–1447. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120104501828.
   Google Scholar
• Gray, R., and B. Neuman. 2010. Evaluation of the MAG Safety and Elderly Mobility Sign Project. Arizona, USA: Maricopa association of governments.
   Google Scholar
• Greenwood, D., and M. Levin. 2007. Introduction to Action Research: Social Research for Social Change. 2nd ed. London, UK: Sage Publications Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Hawkins, H., Jr., M. Wooldridge, A. Kelly, D. Picha, and F. Greene. 1999. “Legibility Comparison of Three Freeway Guide Sign Alphabets.” Research Report 1276-lF, 1–101. College Station, TX: Texas Transportation Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Holick, A. J., and P. J. Carlson. 2002. “Model of Overhead-Sign Luminance Needed for Legibility.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1801 (1): 80–86.
   Google Scholar
• Holick, A., and P. Carlson. 2003. Nighttime Guide Sign Legibility for Microprismatic Clearview Legend on High Intensity Background. FHWA/TX-04/0-1796-4, 1–116. College Station, TX: Texas Transportation Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Holick, A., S. Chrysler, E. Park, and P. Carlson. 2006. Evaluation of the Clearview Font for Negative Contrast Traffic Signs. FHWA/TX-06/0-4984-1, 1–130. College Station, TX: Texas Transportation Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Kuntz, J. E., and R. B. Sleight. 1950. “Legibility of Numerals: The Optimal Ratio of Height to Stroke Width.” American Journal of Psychology 63: 515–561.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kwigizile, V., Oh. Jun-Seok, R. Houten, D. Prieto, R. Boateng, L. Rodriguez, A. Ceifetz, J. Yassin, J. Bagdade, and P. Andridge. 2015. Evaluation of Michigan's engineering improvements for older drivers. Report RC 1636. Michigan: Michigan Department of Transportation, Western Michigan University.
   Google Scholar
• Lauer, A. R. 1932. “Improvements in Highway Safety.” Proceedings Highway Research Board 12: 389–401.
   Google Scholar
• Legge, G., and C. Bigelow. 2011. “Does Print Size Matter for Reading? A Review of Findings from Vision Science and Typography.” Journal of Vision (2011) 11 (5): 8–22. doi:https://doi.org/10.1167/11.5.8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lund, O. 1999. “Knowledge Construction in Typography: The Case of Legibility Research and the Legibility of Sans Serif Typefaces.” PhD thesis, University of Reading.
   Google Scholar
• Mace, D. J. 1988. Sign Legibility and Conspicuity, Transportation in an Aging Society Improving Mobility and Safety for Older Persons. Special Report 218, Vol. 2, 270–293. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
   Google Scholar
• Mace, D. J., P. M. Garvey, and R. F. Heckard. 1994. Relative Visibility of Increased Legend Size vs. Brighter Materialsfor Traffic Signs. FHWA-RD-94-035. Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Mahmassani, H. S., C. W. Frei, and M. Saberi. 2013. Clearview™ Font in Illinois: Assessing IDOT Experiences and Needs. Report No. FHWA-ICT-13-003. Illinois: Northwestern University Transportation Center.
   Google Scholar
• McNees, R. W., and H. D. Jones. 1987. Legibility of Freeway Guide Signs as Determined by Sign Materials, in Transportation Research Record 1149, 22–31. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
   Google Scholar
• Mills, F. W. 1933. The Comparative Visibility of Standard Luminous and Non-Luminous Signs, Vol. 14, 109–128. Public Roads.
   Google Scholar
• Pelli, D. G., and B. Farell. 1995. “Psychophysical methods.” In Handbook of Optics 1: 29–21. New York: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Perea, M., V. Panadero, C. Moret-Tatay, and P. Gómez. 2012. “The Effects of Inter-Letter Spacing in Visual-Word Recognition: Evidence with Young Normal Readers and Developmental Dyslexics.” Learning and Instruction 22 (6): 420–430. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.04.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reimer, B., B. Mehler, J. Dobres, J. F. Coughlin, S. Matteson, D. Gould, N. Chahine, and V. Levantovsky. 2014. “Assessing the Impact of Typeface Design in a Text-Rich Automotive User Interface.” Ergonomics 57 (11): 1643–1658. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2014.940000.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savic, S., and J. Huang. 2014. “Research through Design: What Does It Mean for a Design Artifact to Be Developed in the Scientific Context?” 5th STS Italia Conference 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Shepard, F. D. 1987. Sign Legibility for Modified Messages. Final Report No. FHW AN AIR33.
   Google Scholar
• Sivak, M., P. L. Olson, and L. A. Pastalan. 1981. “Effect of Driver's Age on Nighttime Legibility of Highway Signs.” Human Factors 23 (1): 59–64. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/001872088102300106.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Solomon, D. 1956. “The Effect of Letter Width and Spacing on Night Legibility of Highway Signs.” In Highway Research Board Proceedings, Vol. 35, 600–617. Washington, DC: Highway Research Board.
   Google Scholar
• Sturgis, S., and D. Osgood. 1982. “Effects of Glare and Background Luminance on Visual Acuity and Contrast Sensitivity: Implications for Driver Night Vision Testing.” Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 24 (3): 347–360.
   Google Scholar
• Tinker, M. A. 1966. “Experimental Studies on the Legibility of Print: An Annotated Bibliography.” Reading Research Quarterly 1 (4): 67–118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uhlaner, J. E. 1941. “The Effect of Thickness of Stroke on the Legibility of Letters.” Proceedings of the Iowa Academy of Science 48: 319–324.
   Google Scholar
• Woods, D. L., and N. J. Rowan. 1976. “Overhead Signs without External Illumination.” In Transportation Research Record 611, 38–44. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
   Google Scholar
• Zimmerman, J., and J. Forlizzi. 2008. “The Role of Design Artifacts in Design Theory Construction.” Artifact Ii 2 (1): 41–45. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/17493460802276893.
   Google Scholar