TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
"The whole serif/non-serif argument is culturally
bound. U.S. audiences prefer serif text. European
audiences do not."
True. And some "cultures" drive on the right side of the road and others the
left. (And some just don't care.) But I`ll continue my reply under Dave
Hickey's comments.
Dave Hickey wrote at 14 July 1999
"The reason that the Serif font is better for body
text is because the stems at the base of each
letter forms a line that the eye can easily follow.
If the stems are not there, then the eye has a hard
time following the line, making it difficult for the
person to absorb the material since the eye is
moving all over the place."
Having once taught this subject in my "first life" using these very same
words in a behavioral science course, reading the reply is deja connu. But
what is also applicable to the discussion is that there are those people who
are distracted by too many visual cues, even subtle ones. I suggest that
type with little shoes and berets on each letter can be just such a
distraction.
Understanding that there are those that consider serif fonts a matter of
practice and preference, persuasion will fail. But after carefully
experimenting with various reader audiences and seeking unobtrusive
feedback, I humbly recommend sans-serif fonts for consideration and as a
valid alternative to serif.
Much of my study has been centered around my activities in instructional
designs. I learned that there are adult students that respond well to, and
favor texts in, sans-serif. One of the most interesting benefits, however,
in using sans-serif fonts I witnessed was while I was consulting with a
small but extremely successful financial investment company in Utah. At the
time, this company managed individual private accounts of no less than a
million dollars each. The company carefully worked on and sent to its
investors an extremely important letter that was designed to generate
immediate response from the recipients. Hardly any replies were received by
the company. I was asked to review the letter for content changes. I saw no
need to change the content. But the letter was printed in 12 point, Times
New Roman, and looked terrible. Keeping the text and format the same, we
changed it to 11 point, Arial, and sent the letter out again. The response
to the letter was overwhelming. I asked the company to randomly call several
clients to ask them a list of questions regarding both mailings.
Surprisingly, all (yes, all) thought the second letter was an entirely
different letter-and that the first one was "difficult to read"!
What weight is there in an anecdote? In one, none. But it is illustrative of
many more I could tell. Are there other factors that may be responsible for
favorable responses to sans-serif texts. Yup. Could be that some people have
an aversion to Times New Roman because it brings back bad memories of grade
school. No need to rule out psychological factors. All I care about in the
end is what I call "the real client" and being guided by the operational
question: am I serving the reader of my writing in every way, not just
content? Therein lies one ingredient to the secret of successful technical
writing.
