Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Communicability of the emotional connotation of type

  • Articles
  • Published:
ECTJ Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The communicabllity of the emotional connotation of type was investigated in this study. Typographers, student instructional technologists, and naive readers rated 30 typefaces using a semantic differential scale. The results indicated that different typefaces arouse similar results in different subject groups, and that different subject groups agree on the emotional connotations of typefaces. The agreement of these results with previous studies suggests the use of typeface connotation as a variable in typeface selection.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albers, J. (1963).Interaction of color. New Haven: Yale Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benton, C. L. (1979).The connotative dimensions of selected display typefaces. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism, Houston, TX.

  • Brinton, J. E. (1961). The “feeling” of type faces.Communication Arts, 3, 43–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, J. (1971).Designing with type: A basic course in typography. New York: Watson-Guptill Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dair, C. (1967).Design with type. Buffalo: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, R. Y., & Smith, H. J. (1933). Determinants of feeling tone in type faces.Journal of Applied Psychology, 17, 741–746.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frase, L. T., & Schwartz, B. J. (1979). Typographic cues that facilitate comprehension.Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(2), 197–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, R., & Morris, D. (1967). Communication theory and typographical research.The Journal of Typographic Research, 33, 115–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, J., & Burnhill, P. (1977). Fifty guidelines for improving instructional text.Programmed Learning and Educational Technology, 14, 65–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, J., & Trueman, M. (1981). The effects of change in layout and changes in wording on preferences for instructional text.Visible Language, 15(1), 13–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, J., & Trueman, M. (1983). The effects of headings on recall, search, and retrieval.British Journal of Educational Psychology, 53, 205–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kastl, A. J., & Child, I. L. (1968). Emotional meaning of four typographical variables.Journal of Applied Psychology, 52, 440–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirk, R. E. (1968).Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences. Belmont, California: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koontz, W. A. (1967). The analysis of the effects of three manipulated elements in non-representational line stimuli on connotative meaning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University.

  • Lundhom, H. (1921). The effective tone of lines: Experimental researches.Psychological Review, 28, 43–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macdonald-Ross, M., & Waller, R. (1975). Criticism, alternatives and tests: A conceptual framework for improving typography.Programmed Learning and Educational Technology, 12, 75–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ovink, G. E. (1938).Legibility atmosphere, and forms of printed type. Leiden: A. W. Sijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poffenberger, A. T., & Franken, R. B. (1923). A study of the appropriateness of typefaces.Journal of Applied Psychology, 7, 312–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Secrest, J. M. (1947). Personalities of type design.Printer's Ink, 218, 52–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shebilske, W. L., & Rotondo, J. A. (1981). Typographical and spatial cues that facilitate learning from textbooks.Visible Language, 15(1). 41–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tannenbaum, P. H., Jacobson, H. K., & Norris, L. N. (1964). An experimental investigation of typeface connotation.Journalism Quarterly, 41, 65–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tinker, M. A. (1963).Legibility of print. Iowa: The Iowa State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warde, B. (1956).The crystal goblet: Sixteen essays on typography. New York: The World Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, W. (1949). Recent contributions to the mathematical theory of communication. In C. E. Shannon & W. Weaver (Eds.),The mathematical theory of communication (1–28). Urbana: The University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wendt, D. (1968). Semantic differential of typefaces as a method of congeniality research.Journal of Typographic Research, 2, 3–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zachrisson, B. (1965).Studies in the legibility of printed text. Stockholm: Almquist and Wiksel.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Memphis State University in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction, 38152, Memphis, TN

    Gary R. Morrison

Authors
  1. Gary R. Morrison
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Morrison, G.R. Communicability of the emotional connotation of type. ECTJ 34, 235–244 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02767404

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02767404

Keywords

Search

Navigation