skip to main content
10.1145/2808435.2808447acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschitalyConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Can users read text on large displays?: Effects of Physical Display Size on Users' Reading Comprehension of Text

Published:28 September 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

Large displays are becoming prevalent, but little research has been conducted to quantify their effect on an individual user. We present an experiment in which users' reading comprehension of text displayed on physically large and small displays are compared through three types of tasks. By adjusting the viewing distance for both displays, we maintained a constant visual angle. This experiment demonstrated that differences in display size did not affect users' performance in brief reading comprehension tasks, that is, both search tasks involving small units such as characters or words and comprehension tasks involving larger units such as sentences or paragraphs. We found a large difference between the outcome of this experiment relating to text media and the results of previous research, which showed that for picture and video media, large displays bias users toward an egocentric perspective and small displays bias them toward an exocentric perspective.

References

  1. Bao, P., and Gergle, D. 2009. What's "This" You Say? The use of local references on distant displays. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. CHI '09. ACM, New York, NY, 1029--1032. DOI= http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1518701.1518858. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Buxton, W. 2001. The Invisible Future: the seamless integration of technology in everyday life. Less is More (More or Less), Denning, P. Ed. McGraw Hill, 145--179. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Bystrom, K. E., Barfield, W., and Hendrix, C. 1999. A conceptual model of the sense of presence in virtual environments. Presence. Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 8, 2, 241--244. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Chapanis, A., and Scarpa, L. C. 1967. Readability of dials at difference distances with constant viewing angle. J. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 9, 5, 419--426.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Childs, I. 1988. HDTV-putting you in the picture. IEE Rev., 34, 7, 261--265.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Chou, P., Gruteser, M., Lai, J., Levas, A., McFaddin, S., Pinhanez, C., Viveros, M., Wong, D., and Yoshihama, S. 2001. BlueSpace: creating a personalized and context-aware workspace. IBM Tech. Rep. RC22281.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Czerwinski, M., Tan, D. S., and Robertson, G. G. 2002. Women take a wider view. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. CHI '02. ACM, New York, NY, 195--202. DOI= http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/503376.503412. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Dudfield, H. J., Macklin, C., Fearnley, R., Simpson, A., and Hall, P. 2001. Big is better? Human factors issues of large screen displays with military command teams. In Proceedings of People in Control: International Conference on Human Interfaces in Control Rooms, Cockpits and Command Centres. PIC '01. IEE, Manchester, UK, 304--309. DOI= http://dx.doi.org/10.1049/cp:20010480.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Emoto, M., Masaoka, K., Sugawara, M. and Nojiri, Y. 2006. The Viewing Angle Dependency in the Presence of Wide Field Still Image Viewing and its Relationship to the Evaluation Indices. Displays, 27, 2, 1288--1295.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Hart, R. A., and Moore, G. T. 1973. The development of spatial cognition: A Review. Image and environment: Cognitive mapping and spatial behavior. Downs, R. M. and Stea, D. Eds. Aldine Publishing, 246--295.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Honda, K. 2004. Research of the influence which the difference between page division and screen scrolling has on long-text reading. Japan Ergonomics Society, 40, 3, 166--169.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Ichino, J., Kanayama, N., Tano, S. and Hashiyama, T. 2008. Effects of Display Size and Viewing Distance on User's Visibility. In Proceedings of Human Interface Symposium 2008. HIS '08. Human Interface Society of Japan, 17--24.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Kiyohara, K., Nakayama, M., Kimura, H., Shimizu, H. 2003. An Influence of Display Media and Presentation Style for Sentence Understanding. J. Special Education Technology, 27, 2, 117--126.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Lin, J. W., Duh, B. L., Abi-Rached, H., Parker, D. E. and Furness, T. A. 2002. Effects of Field of View on Presence, Enjoyment, Memory and Simulator Sickness in a Virtual Environment. In Proceedings of the IEEE Virtual Reality Conference 2002. VR '02. IEEE Computer Society Washington, DC, 164--171. DOI= http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/VR.2002.996519. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. MacIntyre, B., and Cowan, W. 1992. A practical approach to calculating luminance contrast on a CRT. ACM Trans. Graphics. 11, 4 (Oct. 1992), 336--347. DOI= http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/146443.146467. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Milner, D., and Goodale, M. A. 1995. The visual brain in action. Oxford Psychology Series 27. Oxford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Nagai, A., Kushida, J., Nakaoka, I., Cooper, E., Oba, K. and Kamei, K. 2009. An Improvement in Readability for Reading Electronic Books on Cellular Phones. In Proceedings of Human Interface Symposium 2009. HIS '09. Human Interface Society of Japan, 1075--1078.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Okano, S., Omodani, M., Nakata, M. and Maeda, S. 2005. Study of Readability as a Target of Electronic Paper: Effect of media handling styles on reading tasks. Technical Report, 104, 666, 13--16.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Omura, A., Akita, K. and Hisano, M. 2001. Psychology of Text Comprehension. Akita, K. and Kuno, M. Eds. Kitaoji-Shobo.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Patrick, E., Cosgrove, D., Slavkovic, A., Rode, J. A., Verratti, T., and Chiselko, G. 2000. Using a large projection screen as an alternative to head-mounted displays for virtual environments. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. CHI '00. ACM, New York, NY, 478--485. DOI= http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/332040.332479. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Piolat, A., Roussey, J., and Thunin, O. 1997. Effects of Screen Presentation on Text Reading and Revising. Int. J. Human-Computer Studies, 47, 565--589. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Prothero, J. D., and Hoffman, H. D. 1995. Widening the field of view increases the sense of presence within immersive virtual environments. Human Interface Technology Laboratory Tech. Rep., R-95-4.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Reeves, B., and Nass, C. 1996. The media equation: How people treat computers. Television, and New Media Like Real People and Places. Cambridge University Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Shigemasu, H., Morita, T., Matsuzaki, N., Sato, T., Harasawa, M., and Aizawa, K. 2006. Effects of physical Display size and amplitude of oscillation on visually induced motion sickness. In Proceedings of the ACM symposium on Virtual reality software and technology. VRST '06. ACM, New York, NY, 372--375. DOI= http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1180495.1180571. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Streitz, N. A., Geißler, J., Holmer, T., Konomi, S., Tomfelde, C. M., Reischl, W., Rexroth, P., Seitz, P., and Steinmetz, R. 1999. i-LAND: an interactive landscape for creativity and innovation. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. CHI '99. ACM, New York, NY, 120--127. DOI= http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/302979.303010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Swaminathan, K., and Sato, S. 1997. Interaction design for large displays. Interactions, 4, 1, 15--24. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Takubo, Y., Mito, H., Katagiri, Y., Nishiyama, Y. and Kameyama, M. 1999. Discourse and context. Iwanami-Shoten.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Tan, D. S., Gergle, D., Scupelli, P., and Pausch, R. 2006. Physically large displays improve performance on spatial tasks. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Int. 13, 1 (Mar. 2006), 71--99. DOI= http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1143518.1143521. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Tjan, B. 1996. Color spaces for human observer. Technical Note, Minnesota Laboratory for Low-Vision Research, University of Minnesota.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Uchida, N. 1995. Discourse processes. Ohtsu, Y. (Ed), Univ. of Tokyo Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Can users read text on large displays?: Effects of Physical Display Size on Users' Reading Comprehension of Text

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Other conferences
          CHItaly '15: Proceedings of the 11th Biannual Conference of the Italian SIGCHI Chapter
          September 2015
          195 pages
          ISBN:9781450336840
          DOI:10.1145/2808435

          Copyright © 2015 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 28 September 2015

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Research
          • Refereed limited

          Acceptance Rates

          CHItaly '15 Paper Acceptance Rate31of59submissions,53%Overall Acceptance Rate109of242submissions,45%
        • Article Metrics

          • Downloads (Last 12 months)6
          • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

          Other Metrics

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader