News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Choosing the perfect typeface by ajross on Friday October 25, 2013 @05:41PM (#6614823)
Has that actually been studied? I mean, is there a quantifiable "2 second impression" that can be measured as different between Roboto and Source Sans? I see this kind of argument made all the time by afficionados of some aesthetic or another (microbrew fans, car nuts, etc...) and invariably the science ends up showing that e.g. wine quality can't be measured objectively at all.

My point here isn't (ahem) "You are wrong.", but more that I think you need to get some perspective about the distinction between strongly held opinion and objective fact.

Re:Choosing the perfect typeface by vdaniuk on Friday October 25, 2013 @05:46PM (#6614860)
Yep, there is quite a problem with that. I've recently was looking for proof that Golden Ratio aesthetical qualities are indeed the global optima for at least some categories of objects. I've found nothing.
Re:Choosing the perfect typeface by huhtenberg on Sunday October 27, 2013 @07:31AM (#6621614)
There's at least one published study with a very large sampling base. I know because I was as skeptical as you are, then I saw the study mentioned in some design book, looked it up and it did in fact exist. I'll try and find the name, but I'm not sure if I still got the book where it was mentioned.
Re:Choosing the perfect typeface by cpeterso on Friday October 25, 2013 @09:25PM (#6615823)
The Golden Radio is numerological nonsense. There is no evidence supporting some inherit beauty of the Golden Ratio.
Re:Choosing the perfect typeface by pikewood on Friday October 25, 2013 @05:53PM (#6614908)
It would be interesting if someone set up a test similar to Harvard's Implicit Association Test to see if this is true.

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/user/agg/blindspot/tab...