Rochester Institute of Technology
RIT Scholar Works
Theses
Thesis/Dissertation Collections
5-1-1979
An Investigation of the Emotional Connotations of
Printing Types
Michael Blum
Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.rit.edu/theses
Recommended Citation
Blum, Michael, "An Investigation of the Emotional Connotations of Printing Types" (1979). Thesis. Rochester Institute of Technology.
Accessed from
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Thesis/Dissertation Collections at RIT Scholar Works. It has been accepted for inclusion
in Theses by an authorized administrator of RIT Scholar Works. For more information, please contact [email protected].
AN INVESTIGATION OF THE
EMOTIONAL CONNOTATIONS
OF PRINTING TYPES
by
Michael L.
Blum
A thesis
submitted in partial fulfillment of the
for the degree of Master of Science in the
Printing in the College of Graphic Arts and
requirements
School
of
Photography
of
the
Rochester
May,
Thesis
advisor:
Institute
of
1979
Mr.
Carl Gross
Technology
School of Printing
Rochester Institute of Technology
Rochester, New York
CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL
MASTER'S THESIS
This is to certify that the Master's Thesis of
Michael L. Blum
with a major in Printing Technology has been
approved by the Thesis Committee as satisfactory
for the thesis requirement for the Master of
Science degree at the convocation of May, 1979.
Thesis Committee:
Carl Gross
~T~h-e-s~i-s-'A~d'v~i's-o-r---------
Robert Hacker
Graduate Advisor
Mark Guldin
Director or Designate
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This
the
project
assistance
parents,
Hank
of
shared
with
me
Thanks
for his
are
I
would
thesis
who
RIT
am
who
helped
for their
thanks
are
think
me
to
greatful
offered
my
of
this
addition
wife
Karen,
make
to
at
this
to mention.
many
thesis
assistance:
Carl Gross,
stages
reality.
a
members
Dr.
for
and
Mr.
other
they
Robert
of
my
Hacker,
Professor Walter Campbell.
and
a
their
Professor Alfred Horton,
of
topic;
numerous
encouragement
due to Professor Archie Provan
the
was
about
critically
number
of
support
Professor Albert Rickmers,
In
too
like to thank the
also
often made
I
and
which
Guldin,
Special
thesis
me
within
for ideas
early age;
ways,
without
indebted to my
am
due to my thesis advisor,
committee
Mark
Dr.
other
assistance
along the way,
an
at
led to this
which
possible
Blum, for instilling
Helen
in many
assistance
I
people.
many
and
have been
not
interest in printing
an
at
would
other
in
my topic.
faculty
various
ways :
Professor Alexander
and
members
Lawson,
Professor Herbert Johnson.
above,
the
help
and
indispensible in the
understanding
completion
M.L.B.
thesis.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
LIST
v
OF FIGURES
vi
ABSTRACT
vii
CHAPTER
I
Footnotes
II
1
INTRODUCTION
6
for Chapter 1
7
A HISTORY OF THE LITERATURE
Non-Empirical Literature
.
Empirical Literature
Footnotes
III
IV
8
.11
23
for Chapter II
HYPOTHESES
26
Definitions
27
Limitations
28
METHODOLOGY
,
Instruments
30
30
The
Measuring
The
Stimulus Materials
33
Sub j
ects
34
Experimental Design
and
Analysis
35
Procedures
Footnotes
34
for Chapter IV
iii
36
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
RESULTS OF THE. RESEARCH
37
ANALYSIS OF THE DATA
41
DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS
46
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
52
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION
55
LIST OF REFERENCES
56
APPENDICES
61
62
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX C.
.66
.
.-.:,
...
...
.'....
iv
.
71
LIST OF TABLES
1
Factors
2
Type Face Predictions
3
Hypothesis
4
Appropriate & Neutral Types Compared to All
Other Types
and
33
Scales
Testing
at
.
.
.
90% Significance.
v
37
44
45
LIST OF FIGURES
1
Semantic Space
31
2
Semantic Differential
31
vi
ABSTRACT
This
thesis
standing the
itself
addresses
emotional
to
a
of
problem
under
printing types
of
connotations
is hypothesized that there is
the
model
It
.
in predicting
useful
*
to
reactions
a
given
type
on
value
atmosphere
usage.
and
The majority
opinions
is
It
empirical.
of
literature
or
with
have
however,
shown,
in terms
a
type
of
to
research
change
the
appropriate,
that
those
stronger
neutral
faces
emotions
or
type
faces
type
and
compared
type
the
of
studies
connotation
of
ability
a
connota
There
.
seems
printing
face
It
to
this
study
predictions
was
appropriate
--
hypothesized
would
to
type
faces
predicted
to
be
and
that
those predicted
to
be
vi 1
to
message.
order
neutral.
to be
These
this
of
their
The
emotional
an
faces.
meaning
predicted
inappropriate;
is
non-
stating
them.
validate
measures
utilized
inappropriate,
type
to
is
subject
author's
formulated in
were
The hypotheses
the
there
of
choice
which
this
on
importance
the
contextual
Five hypotheses
problem.
that
particular
appropriate
for
need
by
attempt
no
shows
tion associated
not
literature
the
characterized
little
with
empirical
be
based
style
arouse
inappropriate would arouse stronger emotions compared to a
type face predicted to be neutral.
It was also hypothesized
that the prediction for the neutral type face would not
arouse stronger emotions compared to all other types tested.
A six-scale semantic differential was uS'ed to test the
reactions of students and employees at RIT to six type faces
and six messages.
Tne scores rtJere taken as absolute values
in order to see the strengtn of the
the message/type face combinations.
emo~ional
response to
Z scores '"-'Jere calculated
to test the hypotheses at the 90% level of significance.
The results show that some of tne hypotheses are valid
at the desired level of significance in all cases tested ,
some are valid for certain messages only, and a few are
rarely valid.
The results seem to show that the emotional connotations
of messages are indeed influenced by type face selection,
and that a methodology for measuring this phenomonen has
been developed.
While the number of type faces and messages
tested was small, the large number of responses obtained
tend to esta.b lisn the metnodology as a sound one for
developing a more extensive body of knowledge on this subject.
Abstract Approved : Carl Gross
Thesis Advisor
. . :. I:.. .:.n=st:..:. ,.ru=..c=t=o;.:. r_ _ _ Tit le
-=2:..:.1.....:.M..:...:.=.ay~19::;..:7'-'9'---_ Da t e
viii
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
It has
printed
styles
which
matter
to
such
and/or
parameters
and
these
studies
Another
for the
readability
as
is
user
affective
excites
between
content
Most
intuitive
of
the
and
of
the most
back
and
and
extensive
Patterson.
great
import
has been variously
called
has
feeling tone,
properties
as
emotional
defined the
Ovink has
typography
literature
Tinker
which
the reader,
visual
statements.
Some
value,
"those
as
within
congenial
print
which
connotation.
feelings
has defined
factor
face
of
typography
atmosphere
type
a
of
a
length-of-
color
by
the
text with
of
style,
paper.
of
measure
size,
conducted
were
aspect
congeniality,
value
of
quality
conducted
attempting to
by
type
of
myriad
have been
studies
designing
someone
from among the
leading, justification,
ground,
or
Many
legibility
of
for
problem
a
choose
in this
help
respect
of
to
matter
available.
degree
line,
been
long
"2
by
while
"a
atmosphere
which
it
Zachrisson
correspondence
form."->
on
this
subject
Relatively few
consists
experimental
of
to
approaches
the
Beatrice Warde,
The best
this
of
this
on
attempted.
has
Paul Beaujon,
as
matter:
typographic
of
part
study
known
also
following
the
written
have been
problem
lies
wisdom
the
connotation,
in
suitability
form to content.
People who love ideas
have a love of words, and that means,
of
must
given
a
they
chance
interest
take vivid
will
in the clothes which words wear.
The more
they like to think, the more they will be
shocked by any discrepancy between a lucid
idea and a murky typesetting.^
Others
in terms
is
one
and
the
communication
at
-media
a
because
pictures
message.-'
less
is
and
The typographer's
Lewis has
less
and
reading
has
role
important
is
that
noted
inclined to
short,
thus
an
--
comprehension,
television he
of
has
typographer
initial attention,
of
person
rather,
the
today,
recall
the average
looking
to
mass
of
quantity
determining
future
copy;
of
exposed
in
role
of
the matter
take a more pragmatic view
read
conditioned
shocking
to
headlines."
been partly defined
"metacommunication"
or
as
the message.
If
a
Ovink has
type,
i.e.,
time
'
the
conveying
created
should
suit
a
a
the
we
make
of
communication.
of
the
its
to
or
the
message.
reader more
idea
this
original
at
message,
mood
feeling
of
the
of
certain
this
feelings
summarized
fulfilling
while
messages
communicating
the
feeling,
general
For
accessible
about
aptly:
function,
same
then we
tendency
by doing
so,
for that kind
The study
in the
applications
include:
the
the
feeling
and
the
screen
congeniality has
of
mood
or
patterns
return
again
to
typography,
can
the
the
of
the
Dowdine
the
while
treatment
length,
greatest
A
substrates,
good
role
and
in
synthesis
type
other
given
school
one
face itself
school
of
can
maintains
that
in terms
of
leading,
aspects
of
presentation
other
determining
the
of
schools
how typography
the variation
line-
message.
to
metacommunication:
typographic
have the
respect
with
basic
of
the meaning,
symmetry,
two
task
accomplish
alter
of
.
discerned
that
in printing,
types
various
would
using different halftone
by
given
examples
used
colors
by
created
thought may be
says
of
few
a
arts;
connotations
impression
To
graphic
other
various
two
the
is
feeling
of
typified
by
the
:
It will be found that almost any quality
inherent in or attributed to a product or
a service can be suggested if care is exercised
in chosing the right type face.
Naturally the
in
which
the
types
arranged
and set
are
way
--
their
sizes
As
an
obvious
to
suggest
the most
used
in
measure.
been
leading
example
--
it
the
count
would
enormously.
be difficult
of
airiness, even with
quality
of types,
if that type were
solid setting to a wider than normal
suitable
a
9
The. entire
not
and
without
concept
of
congeniality,
opposition.
Typical
of
however, has
this
school
of
thought
following
the
are
A lot
remarks
:
has been talked about the
typefaces for certain
I was once asked to design
kinds of job.
a type book on this principle.
You know the
kind of thing:
delicate, pretty little scripts
and eminently respectable roman faces for
It
Banking Houses and Money Lenders.
was only after I had designed about twenty
of
nonsense
appropriate
use
of
...
of
these
their
increasing
According
to
faces
still
type
to
guide
are
type
round
effect.
Rehe,
is
selection
research
have only
of
investigation, but
Ovink has
The
the
could
and
with
change
ever
still
that
problem.
that
the value
eventually
of
of
the major
and
intuition
the
Rehe feels
shown
feelings
the
about
in their infancy,
of
on
will
studies
typographer.
light
at
10
experienced
shed
found I
I
that
examples
typefaces
the
results
certain
research
the
of
methods
may
H
stated:
typographer
the
.
.
.
who
appropriate
did
not
type,
hit
will
upon
not
specially
have done actual harm to the transmission of
the meaning of the text, but he has missed
an opportunity to intensify the force of
impression of the text in a considerable
degree.
---
It is
based.
It
on
premise
that
the
present
is hypothesized that there is
in predicting
atmosphere
this
reactions
value
and
to
usage.
a
given
type
a
study is
model
style
useful
based
on
The
question
following
pages
has been dealt
will
with
summarize
how this
historically.
FOOTNOTES FOR CHAPTER I
Tinker, M.A.
Legibility of Print,
pp.
9-31.
1963),
University Press,
,
2
Ovink , G E
Printed Type,
.
of
.
(Ames:
Iowa State
Legibility, Atmosphere Value, and Forms
A.W. Sijhoff
p.
127.
1938)
,
(Leiden:
,.
,
Studies in the Legibility of Printed
Zachrisson, B.
(Uppsala:
Almqvist and Wiksells Bktryckeri AB,
,
Text,
T9B5),
p.
76.
^Warde,
Publishers,
and
B., The Crystal Goblet,
1956),
-'Harrison, R.
Typographical
(New York:
World
148.
p.
and
D. , "Communication Theory
The Journal of Typographical
and Rehe,
R.F. , Typography :
How
(Indianapolis:
Design Research
Morris,
Research,"
1 (1967): 122;
It Most Legible,
Publications
1974), p. 14.
Research,
to Make
,
Basic Principles,
Lewis, J., Typography:
p.
70.
Publishing Corporation, 1964)
Reinhold
7Rehe,
(New York:
,
R.F.
80vink,
G.E.
14.
p.
,
p.
,
127.
Q
Factors in the Choice
Dowding, G.
(London:
Wace and Company, Ltd.
1957)
,
,
10Lewis,
J.
,
pp.
,
of
Type
p.
81*1
Faces,
52-3.
1:LRehe,
R.F. ; and Rehe, R.F., "Psychological Studies
Inland Printer/
Impact on Modern Typography,
American Lithographer 164 (March 1970) , and 165 (April 1970)
and
Their
120vink,
G.E.,
p.
177.
CHAPTER II
A HISTORY OF THE LITERATURE
Much has been
about
Several
sources
printing type.
of
ing
literature
the
arts
abstracts.
on
bibliography
and
of
Abstracts
a
the
valuable
empirical
the
research,
of
literature
of
to
a
on
Word^
the
of
will
to
addition
contains
problems
published
the
and
a
search
graphic
very
legibility,
of
Legibility
there.
for two
emotional
non-empirical
a
research;
will
research,
lines
only
non-empirical
empirical
account
the
in
in
valuable
years
is
also
connotation
of
type
roughly be broken down into two
can
quantity
on
are
connotation
resource.
The literature
faces
subject
affective
literature may be found
though
,
the
The Visible
complete
much
the
written
be given,
empirical
thorough
study
printing types.
of
by
far
sampling
of
the non-empirical
followed
by
a
literature.
as
the
The
research.
research
findings regarding the
be presented,
categories :
the
out -weighs
detailed
more
A brief
account
connotations
results
emotional
are
of
pertinent
connotations
of
8
NON-EMPIRICAL LITERATURE
The
is
non-empirical
of
comprised
books,
stating their
opinions
characterized
little
with
articles,
or
no
this
subject
type
specimen
authors'
by
the
to
attempt
them.
validate
Beatrice Warde has
the
all
sources,
to
related
treatises,
essays,
other
and
literature
of
audibility
human voice;
a
face
type
compared
she
legibility
tells
to
us:
Set a page in Fournier against another in
Caslon and another in Plantin, and it is
as if you heard three different people
discourse
delivering
the
impeccable
pronunciation
each
through
same
the
medium
and
of
a
each
--
with
yet
clarity,
different
personality 15
.
Exactly
them
use
sense
of
training.
is
a
good
select
she
taste,
cultural
and
typographer's
each
background,
how to
and
literary
1"
a
type
somewhat
more
purpose.
book
be considered,
should
typographical
he
specific
face according
fitness for
addition
are
leaves up to
matter
Dowding is
to
these personalities
what
style
states
He
of
that
to
suggests
the
as
well
period
display
in suggesting how
suitability
that
as
of
the
the
or
theme
of
the
approximate
the book.
type may be
In
chosen
to
some
suggest
Perpetua to
suggest
Turnbull
of
type
of
harmonious
the
with
of
the
of
faces in
printed
precision
as
other
the
of
advertising.
watch
that
stated
being
the
the
as
use
appropriateness
they define
psychological
design
over-all
the
as
well
faces
of
the
and
elements
communication,
terms
in
as
face like
cut
sharply
only to legibility;
second
appropriateness
a
example
Baird have
and
face is
type
a
for
quality,
selection
impressions
they
bear. 18
Harrison
they
and
that
state
connotations,
(b)
of
provide
and
all
style
and
that
the message
new
in Design With Type
and
He
emotional
response
to
weaving:
too
emphasize
feeling
the
type
of
"...In
the
feels
a
certain
itself has
the
certain
in his
typographer
reinforce
the
(c)
minimal
offer
the
is
lines
is
suggests
that
connotations,
connotations,
that
proper
of
type
meaning,
setting
of
affected
used
texture,
type
by
in the
come
face
and
get
For Dair
associations.
in its
letters
have different
like people,
quality
through
composition
of
and
sizes,
can
of
communicate
congruence;"
conflicting
selection
thickness
(a)
can
connotations,
personalities.
finished
can
that
state
face
type
shapes
"connotative
of
type
introduce
(d)
Dair
in
a
speak
a
They
connotations.
choice
Morris
which
the
he
texture
any differences
vertical
and
the
an
part
compares
of
in
the
10
horizontal,
in
lines,
these
relative
of
texture
Old Style
and
of
'tweedy'
line
a
Select Type Faces,
more
which
should
be
largely
out
referring to
a
chart
of
first
the
essential
a
faces;
various
itself.
very
that
of
will
suffice:
design
a
manner
its
Bold."20
to
be
physical
types
which
specify
"Typography being
cannot
be
successfully
elements
to
sensitive
the
there
type
for
obvious
question
Likeness
the
make
only
is
another
face
type
books
Stanley
select
degree
to
of
specimen
Perpetua,
similar
then
Caslon
should
practiced
become
nature,
literature
and
not
way
booklet, How
suitably combining
sources
appropriate
Butler
and
or
these
of
annotated
certain
to
than
thus
the
of
.
.
.
'feel'
combinations
"21
general
non-empirical
is
a
like any art,
feeling,
rule,
While many
a
of
same
with
type
that
states
slide
resolves
of
and
a
the
of
matter
that
does
The booklet
when,
published
spirit
with
worked
by
a
used
will
Clarendon
a
with
states
according to its
characteristics.
threads
line
a
get
separates
The
line in exactly the
our
can
we
that
space
other....
typographic
our
The Intertype Corporation
judged
the
or
'silky'
in textiles;
as
direction
one
in the
variation
any
coarseness
the
affect
by
and
suggestions
category
connotations
.
A few
'style'
of
describe
following:
is
of
work
us,
with
desired.
various
--
examples
Morison tells
classes
of
"Is
a
which
"22
display faces
in
11
a
yodeled
powder
No
at
.
then
zooming
soaring toward
in our opinion,
Switzerland as
face,
of
flying
white
cobalt
skies
through
skiers
and
spirit
chalet
chant
returning
cheeked
high in the Swiss alps...
glancing from peak to peak,
last in a distorted round.
A
SAPPHIRE:
catches
quite
....
the
does Hermann Zapf's
SAPPHIRE (Saphir)
exported to this country
from Germany's Stempel foundry. 23
,
Perhaps the
most
literature is to be found in the
throughout his
book
lists
uses
"In
specific
magazine
journals,
and
"24
chamber
of
who
for instance,
that,
a
of
Hlasta
"It may be
commodity
example,
music
and
arts
magazines
criticized
who
in house
employed
dramatic
of
How to Use Them,
face; for
type
commerce
states,
this
and
is best
Deepdene
Hlasta has been
among others,
out
each
for female employees,
organs
towns.
use,
Types
Printing
for
work
type
of
example
extreme
for
residential
by Zachrisson,
to
sufficient
such
as
a
point
motor
car
variety!"2-'
represents
a
wide
EMPIRICAL LITERATURE
The first
atmosphere
empirical
value
in
written
Begun
as
for
fishery, her
a
college
to
attempt
students
published
is generally
Germany by
study
an
types
of
study
agreed"10
determine the
were
to be
a
Anna Berliner in 1920. 27
most
appropriate
study eventually involved
who
the
about
tested
by
the
order
over
of
type
130 female
merit
12
method
their
on
for advertising
type
fish,
pork
She then tested their
perception
Her
method.
same
of
products
as
determined
in the
faces
or
their
associated
were
criticized
female
was
college
made
all
either
thus
types
later
by
work;
of
the
the
abstract
merit
name
the
as
qualities
of
method
along
both
was
with
men
used
used,
the
and
the
at
of
material
in
were
actual
women
the
were
type
The
three
published
28
Instead
consisted
time
type
the
as
results.
work.
material
of
and
stimulus
Franken
Berliner's
well
entirely
lower-case letters,
and
and
stimulus
faces
type
study may
reliability
up
which
type
variables.
Poffenberger
on
the
sizes
capitals
appropriateness
judgments
that
used
which
Her
test
made
was
various
additional
improved
hand lettering,
nine
or
capitals
study
of
sample
and
specify
not
value,
types
the
products.
which
classes
with
association
not
in that it does
students,
introducing
A
years
of
up
with
that her
significance,
does
using the
types
atmosphere
particular
she
their
and
certain
She illustrates
but
,
a
appropriate
faces.
experiments
be
also
by
type
particular
have
to
seem
that
were
marmalade.
orange
the
of
each
conclusions
and
products :
judgements
aesthetic
legibility for
of
flour,
pancake
hand lettered
of
styles
following
the
of
each
beans,
and
for 18
preferences
of
of
twenty-
for advertising
faces
was
products ;
tested.
faces
were
researchers
tested
and
The
for
the
order
listed
by
concluded,
of
13
The
results
this
of
quite
show
experiment
faces do
conclusively
differing
vary in appropriateness and that judges
that
of
'feel'
to
able
agreement
members
their
because
.
faces
these
having
study may be
taken
contain
own
taken
for
lines
was
and
each
were
the
effects
An
was.
not
to
though
varied,
did
experiment
conducted
not
their
associ
use.
accounts:
several
emotional
from
the
sizes
the
show
four;
the
not
were
its
of
number
to
one
of
of
content
significance;
the
experiment
there
of
sizes
given;
the
strengths of
.
used
"Now is
of
the
from the Declaration
varied
tests
designed to improve
They
an
on
:
atmosphere
traditional
of
into account;
face
type
reference
no
types
was
of
causes
and
structure;
criticized
material,
two
certain
them because
to
Independence, may
which
among
character
to
effects
and
shape
connected
stimulus
in the
different type
the
themselves
their
of
to
and
sexes
sex
29
attributed
Their
the
Furthermore,
between
are
lack
there is
or
appropriateness
same
reactions
They
type
the
of
specimens
ations
this
appropriateness.
close
the
type
the
the
fast going
boldness,
the
following
phrase
for
good
time
country.
upon
all
Zania has
condensation,
two
to
fallen
varied
and
the
expansion,
Davis
earlier
the
as
men
away."
They
1933, by
in
other
type
and
to
Smith,
studies.
stimulus
come
and
->0
material:
the
aid
sections
style,
size,
italics,
and
of
are
asked
14
90
college
types
a
for
various
product
to
students
in different
products
more
was
feeling
They
from
the
of
any
described
get
descending
or
of
results
most
style,
and
showed
the
italics.
which
and
Franken's,
the
addition
Her
conclusions
of
appropriateness
of
the
faces
,
this
automobiles
more
with
and
luxury
the
as
being due
coffee,
than
she
a
shift
faces,
reasoned,
they had been
of
were
her
and
color.
respect
exception
in
of
Pof fenberger
of
with
"coffee."
to
criticized
results
type
and
of
difference
the
two
researchers
repeat
same
this,
the
of
appropriateness
with
"automobiles"
categories
a
virtually the
type
those
different
used
testing for
were
published
to
addition
later
by
essentially
though she
as
the
condensation,
Smith have been
and
techniques
were
In
trends
later Schiller
years
experiments
Extreme size,
same
Davis
statistical
in
characteristics,
influential in expressing
face:
experiments.
for their
these
type
a
family
that
are
order,
tone
boldness,
Two
.
a
They determined
earlier
labor, darkness,
products.-51
not
their
a
get
might
one
follows:
as
Likewise with almost
Some of the feelings
Coal.
products
that
set out in the list might possibly
double interpretation but evidently
to such a degree as the
also
feeling
this
explained
warmth,
product
other
They found
.
different feelings
arouse
association
dirtiness,
of
from the
etc.
to
for these
preferences
feelings
and
likely
persons.
For example,
their
state
of
to
33
the
the
She interprets
values
being
earlier.
--
associated
15
A study
faces
work
of
on
congeniality.
to his
day,
involved the
use
line
constant
subjects
to
the most
as
to
and
of
to
asked
were
analyzed
was
rank-order
and
the
brief descriptions
eight
would
and
qualities,
for example,
Ovink
best be
of
In
a
thin,
book
a
the
etc.;
of
book,
stately
each
Thus,
nature
rhythmic,
freshness
of
quality
type
small
simplified,
in the
faces.
type
the
of
that
of
category
type which ras
a
fairly full, fairly large,
demanded
each
concludes
printed
each
and
in
printed
were
as
ideas.
or
correlation
results
Seventy-
books,
of
a
faces
type
thirty
goods
to
leading.
categories
eight
set
material,
order
eight
method
s
uniform
with
for
form
the
stimulus
for
appropriate
permutations,
of
Ovink'
rank
for
appropriate
re
congeniality
analysis.
and
size
of
study
scientific
the
of
all
summarized
the
in
pioneer
type
of
value
atmosphere
"...the
compared
various
of
and
Ovink
non-sense
length,
the most
data
The
"34
faces to hand writing
type
one
legibility
Ovink has been called,
by
search
the
on
face;
and
the
type
face Excelsior indicated precision,
delicacy,
refinement,
Ovink. is
cautious,
however,
etc.-5--
narrow-mindedness,
terms
For
of
one
his
thing,
tested were
for applying these
recommendations
he
the
cautions
in Dutch,
and
that
apply to different languages.
research
is
needed
and
that
that
reader
the
He
"for
results
also
the
the
results.
adjectives
might
remarks
average
in
not
that more
public,
these
16
are
atmospheres
can
make
are
properly
effect
margins,
as
color
paper
of
In
Ovink
along
significant
results
seemed
with
an
to
show
positive
correlation
Analysis
of
were
and
a
to
sample
combined
ten
with
presented
of
most
of
typography,
and
'
showed
His
significant
legibility
and
that
preferences
these
large extent,
a
using factorial
introspections.
of
statistically
300
varying
with
to
to
preference
habits
previous
a
show
that
choice
for crime,
in different types,
subjects
the
on
data.
type;
to
Analysis
Haskins
felt that
level.
as
a
His
articles
Cheltenham
Futura Bold for
select
articles.
quality
different topics
significant
"high-tension"
of
asked
appropriateness
on
and
randomized
were
for the
articles
highly
Saturday Evening Post
nation-wide
The
face
type
magazine
specific
preferred
of
at
a
performed
was
set
headings
appropriate
established
seemed
to
subjects.
his hypothesis
ten different
headings
the material
variance
more
and
experience.
articles
of
leading
of
Sir Cyril Burt
study,
analysis
introspections
Haskins^*-
the
to
tests
completed
between type
attritibutable,
quality that
certain
on.
investigated the psychology
methods
lay-out
clever
a
relating to the kind
experiments
printed
another
"3"
a
lay-out in terms
of
as
well
for
appropriate
unsuitable.
the
distinct... that
quite
types
such
measure
not
and
sports,
was
findings
demanded
Bodoni
and
a
were
Bodoni
17
for
medicine.
Wrolstad
aesthetic
standards
proportion,
of
the
rhythm,
respondents.
He
typographers;
an
Zachrisson has
opinion
at
was
best
and
sans
and
the
were
asked
each
of
to
six
items.
attempt
attempted
to
of
and
with
a
show
perfume.
that
a
tended
each
other
and
a
roman
also
educated
to
as
did
face
type
of
and
typographic
He
establish
study.
(roman
asymmetric)
The
non-expert.)
,
to
hox^rever,
similar
for example,
invitations
professional
"good"
(symmetric
The data
combinations;
advertisment
education
typography.
presented
variation
the best
agreed
for wedding
contrast,
stating his
by
study
The experiment,
(expert
select
experts
congenial
ment
this
of
failed
"poor"
the material
of
those
with
variance
arrangement
,
and
sex
and
mediocre.^0
serif)
balance,
on
age,
"good"
criticized
subjects
non-
of
study involved the
His
and
responses
Zachrisson to
stimulate
and
^
analysis
that half
the
and
unity,
differences between
the
of
effects
in typography based
their
compared
"poor"
"good"
the
examined
subjects
presentation
that
show
on
,
for
expert
the most
symmetric
arrange
face for the
type
unsuccessfully
adults
are
able
to match
/ 0
typography
with
Brinton
examples
also
of
attempted
art
to
/
expert
and
non-expert
groups.
and
test
painting
the
.
difference between
o
He
tested
13
type
faces
18
a
using
differential
semantic
adjectives.
44
Tannenbaum,
for three
groups:
in
was
the
upper
the
same
that
showed
in
The
the
the
faces
type
groups;
to be more
and
professional
and
while
potent,
the
an
case
italics
letters
groups
the
were
other
judged
judged to be
were
and
group judged
than
general
used,
variance
of
analysis
semi-professional
in
upper
were
material
stimulus
professional
favorably
more
letters
roman
of
results
had the highest agreement;
The
type
inclination,
and
letters.
of
semi-
faces
type
italic*
roman
differential
connotations
Four
case
alphabet.
emotional
amateurs.
size,
general
a
semantic
typographers,
lower
and
the
used
also
professional
and
professionals,
of
al.
there was
non-experts.
and
determine the
to
that
concluded
experts
et
technique
all
1
He too
between
agreement
26 bi-polar
of
scale
more
active.
Wendt
cautioned
but
not
conducted
that
the
research.
He
connotations,
of
the
restricts
in German.
generality
tool
stated
that
advantage
is "that
it
of
the
"^7
lay-outs
He
of
be
can
descriptions,
main
or
also
used
to
various
kinds
li.fi
He
results,
typographic
the
compare
the
its
.
the
of
association
suggests
of
for
a
objects.
typographical
experiment
similar
the method as
value
differential
kinds
this
a
fields
use
of
semantic
any
in testing
19
A study
by
Kastl
four typographical
meaning
of
curved,
bold
light,
versus
48
versus
sans-serif.
and
analysis
an
previous
of
The
stimulus
of
arranged
in four rows;
alphabet
to
Kleper
levels
to
feeling
faces
asked
or
with
emotive
is
of
and
is
validity
that
test,
a
responses
type
of
more
in
various
He
also
or
qualities
to note
questionnaires
which
the
method
in
to
He
respondent
to
some
classify
type
associate
that
having
little
differences,
or
none
contrasts,
51
emotionality."
affect
such
has
depicting
faces
having
projected
a
concluded
type
Kleper
that
would
to
the
of
educational
subjects
and
others
and
combine
interesting
accurate
feminine
Structural
all
criticized
49
question.
his
asked
with
accord
capitals,
drawings
with
distinguishes
which
appeal
faces
businesses.
morphology.
visual
It
from
particular
strong
one
respondents
serif
faces,
slides
all
to
type
in
generalizability from
page
masculine
"The definition
in
alphabet
open
emotion.
as
of
is
printed
associate
faces
type
a
the
32 type
has been
consisted
versus
and
ornate,
used
experiment
the
emotional
angular
results
showed
material
the
--
versus
experiment
Their
letters
sixteen
variables
simple
variance
experiments.
because the
first
Child tested for
and
questions
and
studies,
be to
no
a
use
control
the
suggests
polygraph
as
to his
.
face combinations;
Morrison tested
thirty
type
families,
weight
variations
three
and
italic
five
versus
20
52
roman.
to
have
that
and
connotation
are
to
form,
of
face
therby
resembled
of
analysis
variance
italic type faces
He
potency.
can
which
and
that
show
recommended
study be
a
particularly
and
of
made
the
reinforce
attempted
an
communicate
the
of
Lundholm.
expressed
Using
angles
suggested
it may be
of
lines,
further
to
emotional
contextual
meaning
and
He
his
asked
intense
of
of
Werner
research
and
the
on
that
the
shows
a
s
also
earliest
chart
of
been
studies
eight
small
was
draw lines
of
low
the
in
with
thin
sharp
Large
lines
attempted
of
lines,
connection
congeniality
border designs
which
waves
representative.
mentioned
on
and
congeniality
is
manner
adjectives.
waves
Kaplan have
work
a
conducted
rapid movement.
strength,
Lundholm'
of
groups
and
movement,
suggestive
Poffenberger has
to
is
face.
lines
subjects
in
to vary
he determined that long,
weakness.
stated
type
on
thirteen
of
suggestive
the
the
on
tend
can
lines
of
that printing
observed
studies
weak
were
connotations
earliest
feeling
slow,
synthesize
have
54
the
were
waves
emotional
as
percentages,
suggested
high
up
the
lines, depending
to
One
He
in their
interest here,
similar
one
words
the message. ^3
types
by
nonsense
type
The study
of
rate
feeling
a
determine if
of
differential technique
seemed
communicate
study,
semantic
sentences
data
the
the
used
subjects
English
on
He
in his
of
to
and
55
with
type.
article
21
on
feeling
the
be
might
more
effectually
feelings
the
lines, ^
of
between quality,
relation
and
value
that
Morrison has
the
research
are
quite
of
to
similar
that
out
height,
--
the
and
type
which
the
of
line
of
them."--'
variables
width,
in
the ways
rhythm
and
"they
that
account
in seeing
aroused
pointed
lines
by taking
used
direction
are
states
and
used
curvature
in
--
He
vary.
can
states:
There
typefaces
are
are
which
curved
and
others
Different typefaces exhibit
variations in stroke width from hairline strokes
to very thick strokes.
A typeface can give the
illusion of height through variations in x-height,
which
are
angular.
length
the
in the
the
of
pattern
letters.
ascenders
created
biS
by
and
upper
The
most
common
on
type
face congeniality is
ments
variable
of
attempted
the
stimulus
to have
material
stimulus
did this.
It
itself,
it is
shown
how
as,
"When In
and
used
the
alphabet,
matter.
printed
Kastl
and
that
Child have been
which
did
disclose his
may
not
apply
to
stimulus
of
course
is
and
the
experi
confounding
experimenters
that many
experimenters
which
communications
slides,
not
the
,
case
attributable
doubtful
some
the
While the
connotation
such,
normal
with
neutral
was
lower
noted with
material.
phrases,
some
be
to
problem
descenders
and
so
it
of
them
familiar
different from
criticized
material.
the
human events....";
too may
printed
used
to
media,
confound
the
for using
while
Brinton
22
One
of
fruitful
the most
may be found in Kleper 's
suggestion
to measure
reaction
It has
also
research
the
the
emotional
been
which
context
would
of
Rehe has
congeniality,
pointed
a
out
of
a
of
there
that
how
show
for future
avenues
polygraph
a
to
subject
is
face
type
a
using
the
can
research
type
need
for
reinforce
message.
summarized
and
of
some
arrived
at
the
literature
the
following
on
conclusions:
say that typography does not need
Their arguments
framework.
are well founded.
and
Printing
typography indeed
have a proud and long history.
But typography,
above all,
is a means of communication and has
to convey information as productively as
possible.
Today, we in the printing industry
are still somewhat hesitant to apply the results
suggested.
However, if we combine inherited
Some
all
might
this
scientific
.
.
.
.
wisdom
then
and
all
.
.
.
.
tradition
will
with
benefit
society in general,
typographic
.
art
-*9
.
--
and
new
scientific
industry,
the
proud,
findings,
consumer,
historic
faces
23
FOOTNOTES FOR CHAPTER II
13Spencer,
H.
,
House, Publishers,
14
^Foster, J. J.
Humphries, 1970
ed.
,
Lund
15Warde,
B.
,
16Warde, B.
17Dowding, G.
,
18Turnbull,
of
Dair
Toronto
21
p.
147.
R.
C.
.
79-82.
pp.
A.T.
^Harrison,
20
138.
The Graphics of Com
Baird, R.N.
189-90
pp.
Holt, Rinehart Co.
1964)
and
(New York:
munication,
1971)
,
,
Morris, D.
and
,
p.
,
120.
(Toronto:
Design With Type,
pp.
3
,
Hastings
(London:
Legibility Abstracts,
,
and
p.
,
(New York:
The Visible Word,
1968), pp. 83-107.
University
Press, 1967),
Intertype Corporation, How to Select Type Faces
The Intertype Corporation, 1949), p. 15.
,
(Brooklyn:
22
Morison,
S., A Tally
University Press, 1973)
,
p.
of
Types,
(Cambridge:
Cambridge
104.
oo
Butler, K.
and Likeness,
G. , Practical Handbook on
,
Typefaces for Publication Layout, (Mendota:
Butler
Typo-Design Research Center, 1959) , p. ?6
Display
.
24
Hlasta,
(Pittsburgh:
S.C., Printing Types and How
Press, 1950), p. 29.
25Zachrisson,
26See
the
B.,
mental
7
of
study
vertising,"
Them,
80.
of
the
Journal
and
Franken, R.
"A study
,
faces,"
of
Applied Psy
p.
R. and Smith, H. , "Deter314; Davis,faces,"
tone in type
Journal of Applied
of
(1923),
feeling
Psychology, 17 (1933),
chology,
p.
Poffenberger, A.T.
appropriateness
minants
to Use
Carnegie
type
p.
742;
and
appropriateness
of
Applied
of
-Journal
Schiller,
of
color
Psychology,
19
G.
,
and
"An
experi
type
(1935)
,
in
ad
p.
652,
24
27
Drucktypen,"
Berliner, A., "Atmospharenwert von
(Zeitschrlft fur angewandte Psychologie) 17 (1920)
pp.
,
165-172.
28
^Poffenberger,
29
30
31
A.T.
and
Franken, R.B.,
pp.
Poffenberger, A.T.
and
Franken, R.B.,
p.
Davis, R.C.
and
Smith, H. J.
,
pp.
Davis, R.C.
and
Smith, H.J.
,
p.
and
Child,
312-29.
328.
742-64.
749.
00
JZ-Kastl,
of
Psychology,
gation
of
A.J.
four typographical
of
Type"".
1977),
52
the
(Ann
(1968),
440;
Communlcability of
Arbor:
University
p.
"Emotional meaning
I.L.,
Applied
Morris'on, G. , An Investi
the Emotional Connotation
Microfilms International,
variables,"
Journal
of
and
32.
p.
33Schiller,
G.
652-64.
pp.
,
34
Zachrisson, B.,
p.
350vink,
G.E.,
pp.
360vink,
G.E.
p.
37
'Burt,
(Cambridge:
,
82.
155, 159,
and
169.
177.
Sir Cyril,
Cambridge
A Psychological
Study
of
University Press, 1959)
Typography,
.
o o
Haskins,
J.B.
"Testing
matter,"
editorial
pp.
subject
suitability
Journalism
of
typefaces
Quarterly,
35
for
(1958),
186-94.
Wrolstad, M.E.,
exploring the function
37 (.1960), pp. 211-21.
B.
Zachrisson,
,
"Adult
p.
^Zachrisson,
B.,
pp.
^"Zachrisson,
B.
p.
43Brinton,
,
"The
J.E.,
Communication Arts
,
3
in typography:
Journalism Quarterly ,
preferences
design,"
of
83.
156-62.
162.
'feeling'
(1961)
of
Press,
1957)
.
faces,"
.
See Osgood, C.E., Succi, G.J.
The Measurement of Meaning, (Urbana:
Illinois
type
,
and
Tannenbaum, P.H.,
University
of
25
"An
^-'Tannenbaum,
p.H., Jacobson,
H.K.
and
,
investigation of typeface
Journalism Quarterly, 41 (1964), pp. 65-73.
Norris, L.N.,
connotations
experimental
46
Wendt, D.
"Semantic Differential
,
research,"
method
of
Research,
congeniality
2 (1968), pp.
47Wendt,
D.
48Kastl,
A.J.,
p.
,
^Morrison,
G.
typefaces
of
Journal
of
as
a
Typographic
3-25.
5.
and
,
p.
Child,
I.L.,
440-6.
pp.
34.
A Historical Investigation of Typographic
Kleper, M.
Morphology and Emotional Response Elicit a tion, (Unpublished
Bachelor s Thesis, Rochester Institute of Technology, 1969).
,
51Kleper,
M.
,
113.
p.
p.
119.
G.,
p.
119.
H.
"The
->2Morrison,
G.
-^Morrison,
--^Lundholm,
,
,
affective tone of lines:
P s y cho log ic al Revi ew , 28
researches,"
experimental
pp.
(1921),
43-60.
h. , and Kaplan, B., S ymbo I F o rma t i on ,
John Wiley and Sons, Inc , 1963) , pp. 337-64.
-^Werner,
(New York:
.
^"Poffenberger,
lines,"
of
pp.
Journal
A.T. and Barrows, "The
Applied Psychology, 8
of
value
187-205.
^7Poffenberger,
A.T.
5Morrison,
pp.
-^Rehe,
G.
R.F.,
,
modern
,
and
Barrows,
p.
205.
41-2.
"Psychological
p.
60.
typography,"
on
feeling
(1924),
studies
and
their
impact
26
CHAPTER III
HYPOTHESES
The previously
is
there
an
however,
emotional
the
appropriate
a
for
need
to
type
order
were
will
the
which
this
measures
seems
the
ability
of
a
following
shown,
in terms
There
meaning
the
problem
A
set
message
experimenter
to be
stronger
arouse
In
set
a
in
appropriate
to
of
be
of
printing
In
message.
hypotheses
face
2.
A
perimenter
face
3.
to be
A
message
to be
by
set
in
that message,
to
by
face
type
the
same
experimenter
predicted
the
same
type
appropriate
to
face
to
be
by
will
message
experimenter
a
the
that message,
to
to
the
by
message.
a
compared
predicted
experimenter
in
to
predicted
appropriate
emotions
stronger
set
message
predicted
compared
emotions
type
face
type
a
be inappropriate to that
type
connotation
face.
contextual
not
formulated:
message
to
research
have
studies
this
of
type
of
choice
study
1.
the
importance
change
to
These
that
show
with
associated
connotation
faces.
type
particular
literature tended to
cited
set
the
arouse
in
neutral.
predicted
that message,
by
ex
the
will
a
27
arouse
in
set
stronger
all
4.
A message
in
set
to be
stronger
the
same
message
tested.
a
face
type
emotions
by
predicted
the
to
compared
the
same
the
by
predicted
inappropriate to that message,
face
type
a
in
set
to
compared
faces
type
other
experimenter
arouse
emotions
will
message
to
experimenter
be
neutral.
5.
A
message
experimenter
emotions
be
to
a
neutral
face
type
will
arouse
not
to
the
same
post
hoc
analysis
compared
predicted
message
set
by
the
stronger
in
all
other
faces tested.
type
Additional
for
in
set
other
significant
be done to
will
test
interactions.
DEFINITIONS
Certain terms
This
Emotion:
the
as
points
on
-3
to
with
+3,
stronger
term
shall
semantic
larger
are
study
be operationally defined
differential
absolute
defined below.
values
scale
running from
representing
emotions.
Connotation
meaning
in this
used
of
denotative
a
This
:
type
face
term
or
shall
message,
to
refer
as
the
emotional
distinct from the
meaning.
Message:
This
shall
be defined
as
a
sentence
or
28
phrase
however,
having
both
having
the
no
denotative
a
alphabet
particular
Appropriate type face:
as
a
to
have
a
face
type
particular
connotation
a
to
have
a
face
type
particular
to
face
type
particular
have little
face;
type
or
no
a
term
by
predicted
term
predicted
connotative
by
value
be defined
experimenter
given
message.
be defined
shall
the
experimenter
shall
the
a
be defined
message.
given
This
This
shall
the
by
different from
connotation
Neutral
term
predicted
Inappropriate type face:
as
connotation.
This
similar
meaning;
a
considered
or
meaning
connotative
"message"
be
shall
a
and
its
a
to
experimenter
on
as
own.
LIMITATIONS
This
No
is
attempt
limited
hypotheses,
measuring
in
in
hypotheses
and
appropriate
to
to
to
order
some
test
faces
display
of
It
arrive
will
more
a
at
faces
typographical variable
all
will
ascertain
situations,
test
type
to
made
instrument.
researchers
faces,
being
number
he limited in the
shall
study
type
be
and
the
used
to
Only
test
the
the
of
validity
a
of
the
be left to future
generalized
general.
being
respects
faces.
the veracity
theoretical
in
following
tested
selection
of
type
bases for selecting
Furthermore,
by
these
the
only
hypotheses
29
will
by
be
that
cap height
approximate
similar
constant
case
of
type
will
length
face
remain
of
position
typographical variables.
letters.
as
constant,
line,
between samples,
Size,
style.
all
type
In
as
will
on
determined
paper,
paper,
order
tested
to
will
and
color,
other
keep form
be
upper
30
CHAPTER IV
METHODOLOGY
This
has been divided into the
chapter
The measuring
and
subjects,
instruments,
the
the
stimulus
design
experimental
following
the
materials,
and
parts:
procedure.
THE MEASURING INSTRUMENTS
This
section
used
of
a
discussion
the
of
bases underlying the measuring instruments
theoretical
to be
consists
in this
research;
the
namely,
semantic
differential.
Osgood,
of
concepts.
et
discuss the
al,
They
Euclidian in nature,
view
concepts
similar
other
dissimilar
can
while
tive
concepts
semantic
subject
scales.
be
be far
differential technique
rating
These
a
concept
scales
on
are
a
as
close
shown
series
arranged
theory
semantic
vast
a
region,
In this
concepts.
would
as
the
of
space
all
would
be graphically illustrated
The
the
semantic
containing
conception,
use
to
each
apart.
in Figure
This
1.
involves
of
bi-polar
graphically
adjec
so
that
31
FIGURE
there
are
seven
between
steps
1
each
the
of
two
bi-polar
adjectives :
hot
cold
~~^l
~=1
The
spaces
~~-l
I
0
corresponding to +
or
-
rated
is
the
cells
labeled 2 indicate the
two
closely
related
to
labeled 1 indicate
relation.
a
single
A
the
a
number
concept
related
end
slight
of
of
the
slow
of
the
concept
is
somewhat
the
and
can
0
be
scale,
cells
indicates
used
to
no
judge
(see Figure 2.)
2
X
happy
end
one
scale,
scales
FIGURE
hard
to
relation,
these
3
3 indicate that the
concept
strongly
2
sad
X
soft
X
fast
32
By plotting
these points
differentiate meaning both in
origin,
and
in terms
identify
et
al
of
meaning.
One
that
distance the
greater
closer
the
a
the
difference
is
to
the
greater
dissimilarity
concept
the
intensity
and
quality
the
Osgood,
origin.
semantic
distance;
can
between
origin,
the
it is.
meaningless
The
see
linear
to
the
thus
can
one
space,
direction from the
of
as
semantic
more
terms
these properties
equated
and
semantic
distance from the
of
has been
concepts;
in
semantic
differential technique has been
useful
c o
in quantifying
work
and
this
with
arriving
at
the variance
attributable
main
of
series
in
bi-polar
Osgood
concepts.
semantic
to bi-polar
evaluation,
studies
applied
of
previous
it
scales
was
for
most
was
representing three
to
the
connotative
researchers.
decided to
each
and
factor
use
potency.
chosen
a
as
study because it has been
fli.
faces by
scores
for
valid
found that
al
differential has been
instrument for this
successfully
early
reliability,
adjectives
differential
adjectives
activity,
semantic
measuring
et
the
of
fi 3
factors:
The
a
Much
involved testing its
technique
differentiating
of
meaning.
connotative
Based
three
meaning
on
factors
(see Table 1.)
of
type
these
with
two
sets
33
1
TABLE
FACTOR
SCALE
Evaluative
pleasant /unpleasant
good/bad
rugged/ delicate
Potency
heavy/weak
Activity
active/passive
exciting/ calming
THE
The
faces
from
and
as
materials
faces,
type
cap height.
mately the
characters.
consist
of
letters
in
order
messages
Type
the
the message
to make
will
be
faces
opinion
congeniality
intuitively
of
set
and
the
with
to
fit
a
approxi
additional
order,
meaningless.
page
be
will
other.
which
having
be
All
8%"
on
experimenter,
predict
a
will
alphabetical
relatively
messages
each
in
An
selected
having
phrases
phrase
of
"message"
will
or
number
same
faces
or
type
parts:
be used,
will
sentences
sentence
two
of
type
all
with
Five
each
messages,
consist
Six type faces
messages.
display
constant
used
stimulus
STIMULUS MATERIALS
type
wide.
selected
which,
have varying degrees
The
experimenter
faces
are
will
appropriate,
in
of
34
inappropriate
and
comparison with
The
for
possible
The
faces, five
be
will
sentences,
combined
be
combination will
pages
results.
face may be
type
each
subsequent
type
six
for
for the messages,
neutral
arranged
in 36
the
and
8%"
in
random
Each
ways.
5%"
pages.
x
on
printed
alphabet
order.
SUBJECTS
The
at
subjects
random
Institute
staff,
from the
service
administration,
and
groups
be
shall
experiment
following
Technology:
of
food
for the
for this
at
secretarial
the
Rochester
janitorial
staff,
personnel,
maintenance
students.
Fifty
chosen
faculty,
crews,
subjects
desired
are
study.
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN AND ANALYSIS
This
experiment
connotative
meanings
determine how
subjects
on
a
will
6- scale
The
involves
of
predicted
rate
the
semantic
data for
all
determine if type face
type
the measurement
faces
and
combinations
of
messages,
change
36 type face/messages
the
to
responses.
combinations
differential.
subjects
will
predictions
be
analyzed
to
results
as
show
The
out-
35
lined in
or
the
lower
five hypotheses,
absolute
scale.
A
applied
to
z-test
values
using
a
on
the
semantic
90% level
hypothesis
each
indicated
as
to
higher
differential
will
significance
of
its
test
by
be
validity.
PROCEDURES
The
experiment
will
be
presented
individually.
The instructions
that
connotations
emotional
measured.
that
Subjects
will
possible
They
and
will
not
be
to
type
give
faces
be instructed to
indicate how they feel
pages.
of
will
to Subjects
change
are
what
they
to
work
as
previous
being
check
about
requested
indications
no
see
on
rapidly
answers.
boxes
the
the
as
36
FOOTNOTES FOR CHAPTER IV
fin
Osgood,
The Measurement
Press,
1957),
C.E., Succi, G.J., and Tannenbaum, P.H.,
of Meaning,
(Urbana:
University of Illinois
pp.
25-30.
61
Osgood, C.E.,
p.
Succi, G.J.,
and
Tannenbaum,
P.H.,
Succi,
and
Tannenbaum,
P.H.,
and
Tannenbaum,
P.H.,
26.
620sgood,
pp.
76-77.
pp.
36-8.
630sgood,
C.E.,
G.J.,
C.E., Succi, G. J.
,
64
pp.
Tannenbaum, P.H., Jacobson, H.K.,
pp.
65-73; Brinton, J.E.; Wendt, D.
Morrison,
,
G.
andNorris,
3-25;
and
L.N.
,
37
CHAPTER V
RESULTS OF THE RESEARCH
Five
messages
Type faces
study.
and
the
were
alphabet
selected
by
the
in this
used
were
experimenter
with
*
the
advice
of
The
The
A
other
than
the messages
in
general
that
the
that
could
along
with
experts
of
to
alphabet
four
all
set
at
Technology
in
each
whether
agreement.
The
predicted
be
used
type
to
School
the
the
panel
faces
of
type
predictions
agreed
the
view
faces used,
made
almost
be among
effectively convey
TABLE
asked. to
six
in
Printing
of
was
the
would
their
listed in Table 2.
are
of
validate
Palatino.
was
of
Institute
neutral
cases
predictions
Rochester
and
all
face
the
order
the
formed the
and
inappropriate
type
panel
in
typographer,
face in
type
neutral
messages
respective
commercial
for appropriate,
predictions
types.
a
were
entirely
possible
types
messages.
2
Message
Appropriate
Inappropriate
THE OLD CATHEDRAL
ALL THE LATEST FASHIONS
GLASS AND STAINLESS STEEL
DATA PROCESSING CENTER
PACK PUNCH AND POWER
Uncial
Bernhard
Computer
Uncial
Cooper
Uncial
Bernhard
Prisma
Computer
Cooper
38
Some
of
some
selections;
those
had
questioned
for
reservations
various
CENTER,"
most
was
but the
comment
was
felt that the
average
panel
was
a
there was
no
tied
the
to
off
subject
by
the
be considered;
face
type
selected
The
the
set
in
of
the
CATHEDRAL,"
message
in
should
the
type
historically
face
of
off
given
of
be considered;
type
feeling
should
of
stroke
type
the
selected
the message;
the
the
the
perceive
we
the
by
be
should
content
blackness
what
be
included
answers
be considered;
should
Here
general.
The
opinion.
for
bases
should
be
current
.
37
of
poor
One
that
their
to
as
message
pictorial
feeling
should
.
"THE OLD
associate
would
face
relative
pages
remaining
each,
of
entire
for the
questionnaire
consisted
and
.
a
matter;
according to
be.
to
usage
a
Palatino; however, he
questioned
type
reading distance
given
the
also
the
according to the
the
person
uniformity
following:
be
important factor.
an
face for
type
selecting
might
Uncial.
with
readily
the
was
type would be
appropriate
The
Computer
that
Computer,
type Moore
the
with
felt that for the message,
respondent
the most
coupled
made
if readability
choice
more
often
"DATA PROCESSING
the message,
example
about
six
--
pages
type
one
main
page
containing
faces.
part
the
of
containing
each
of
research
instructions,
six messages
(See Appendix C.)
The
39
pages
the messages
with
differential
semantic
included
also
for
scale
a
seven-step
the
of
each
six
scales
listed in Table 1.
In
was
not
the
booklets
to
a
of
random
A total
made
The
subjects
between
ratio
time
the
case
were
using
were
and
selected
the
on
from
subjects
The
person
or
School
of
if
a
to
graduate
research
project
messages
by
at
RIT.
It
willing to participate,
their
opinions
checking
on
various
the boxes
that
in
each
lists
subjects
it
was
random
through
further
was
at
the
student
telephone;
selected
were
rate
by
All
had been
Printing
they
asked
in
and
name
their
students.
was
subjects
employee
in
that
research,
during
campus
numbers.
contacted
in this
between full-time
ratio
conducted.
random
at
according
40 full-time
student
students
was
and
study,
computer.
utilized
were
and
by
random
participate
and
generated
pages
this
of
sequence
computer-generated
explained
be
as
full-time
experiment
either
that
same
results
random
a
employees
employee
approximately the
employees
numbers
10 full-time
of
up
50
of
in
assembled
were
the
of
sequence
factor in the
significant
list
a
insure that the
to
order
to
the
explained
they
would
statements
expressed
how they
felt.
All
and
all
of
the
but two
employees
of
the
contacted
students
agreed
initially
to participate,
contacted
were
40
willing
fill
to
distributed
through
Mail
by
the
in
either
the
return
subjects,
in person,
postage-paid
though not
test booklets.
discussing
the
The booklets
questionnaire.
through
departmental secretaries,
with
the
out
These
results.
or
by
will
means
envelopes.
solicited,
be
mail
campus
Some
were
mentioned
of
were
folders,
U.S.
comments
written
where
on
significant
41
CHAPTER VI
ANALYSIS
Several
to
specialized
the
analyze
OF THE DATA
computer
data for this
programs
written
were
due to the large
experiment,
*
amount
of
data involved;
scales
on
each
The data
answers.
according to
assembled
for
each
pages
in
random
page
subjects
Careful
page.
insure accuracy,
entered,
and
that
all
messages
entered
once
and
only
each
for correcting
means
Scores
being
the neutral
delicate
scales
and
were
rugged
weak,
given
and
as
and
that
face
along
entered
with
scores
the
passive
and
and
scores,
active
calming
while
and
a
.
of
pleasant
subject
print-out
The polarity
follows:
the
combinations
to +3
scale
six
each
A hard copy
provided,
face
built into
were
type
were
the
-3
positive
heavy,
by
computer
type
from
a
on
point.
assigned
and
once.
was
in the
and
followed
checks
improperly
coded
were
arbitrarily
bad,
scores
subject's
stored
including
to
of
individual
the message
sequence,
six
marking
Since the booklets
number.
programs
were
and
first entered,
was
each
10,800
yields
entered
was
subject
for that
scores
36
of
50
with
scales
and
ends
was
good,
of
unpleasant
exciting
0
were
the
and
42
given
negative
Since
to
order
if
a
subject
to
the
evaluative
subject
who
closest
to
given
score
a
scores
the
by
reflect
for
all
the box
for that
+3
have been
the mean
of
and
interesting
it does
provide
us
The hypotheses
of
the
the
scores
at
used
are
not
the
and
a
good
was
for
three
subjects
factors
In Appendix A.
for
factors
all
direction
valuable,
These
,
and
the
of
While
this
in itself
study.
concerned
but
all
data necessary to test
the
rather
involved in the
scores
hand,
combinations.
in this
in any case,
relationships
In arriving
and
message/ type face
five hypotheses
to
all
variance
is both
the
conflicting
checking the box
for
face,
the magnitude
with,
the
closest
and
information
not
score
message/type
other
summarized
type
and
by
the
page,
that
(-3)
combination.
factors
three
same
On the
page
same
For
unpleasant
factor for that
other.
and
message
indicative
scores
of
scores
of
combined,
the
marked
for
the box
the
on
each
on
taken.
was
in
scales,
subject
each
indicating
each
pleasant
These
each
0,
was
neutralized
(+3)
two
of
up
scales
checked
good
scores
for
two
the
of
combination
made
score
for
face
are
a
was
the box
assigned
on
at
the mean
example,
.
factor
each
arrive
factor,
and
scores
with
the
attempt
magnitude
in Appendix A,
of
much,
direction
to
define
scores.
of
the
43
information regarding the
magnitude
have been
averaging.
the
canceled
out
by
hypotheses it is necessary
absolute
data is
or
scores,
having
is
mation
face
type
neutral
fail to
3
type
the neutral
other
type
results
of
faces
for
testing
as
faces
are
within
the
listed,
as
listing
all
to
appropriate
show
other
been
type
face, Palatino,
only If the
critical
and
faces for
obtained
with
all
In Table
the
at
z
region;
type
neutral
each message.
results
for the
the
are
entire
faces
are
not
provided
compared
The data has
who
50
to
also
were
essentially the
of
are
necessitate
subjects
group
the
type
all
scores
would
3,
90% level
for
scores
z
comparison
separately for
the
we
faces
Therefore Table 4 has been
scores.
and
compared
given message.
meaningful
analyzed
employees,
those
a
that
we
type
appropriate
with,
these hypotheses
affirmative
given
5 deal
a
significance
hypothesis.
null
and
in this
indicates
while
infor
this
of
of
"No"
hypothesis,
Hypotheses
and
90% level
and
"Yes"
An Answer
the
at
of
the
of
each
inappropriate,
A summary
predictions.
the
reject
as
This
neutral.
be tested for
appropriate,
that
the null
reject
each
listed in Table 3.
indicates
table
test
to
data
the
analyze
may
in Appendix B.
summarized
messages
scores
Therefore
deviations from
as
The hypotheses may
five
to
the
of
same
subjects.
as
all
44
TABLE
3
HYPOTHESIS TESTING AT 90% SIGNIFICANCE
HYPOTHESIS #
:l.
IS CONNOTATION OF
APPROPRIATE TYPE GREATER THAN INAPPROPRIATE TYPE?
MESSAGE
Z
ANSWER
THE
OLD
CATHEDRAL
-0*03
ALL THE LATEST FASHIONS
GLASS AND STAINLESS STEEL
-0*48
NO
YES
NO (=)
1,52
DATA
PROCESSING CENTER
PACK PUNCH AND POWER
NO
0,97
2*61
<=>
.
<
=
>
YES
HYPOTHESIS #
2
IS CONNOTATION OF
APPROPRIATE TYPE GREATER THAN NEUTRAL TYPE?
MESSAGE
Z
ANSWER
THE
OLD
CATHEDRAL
1,66
YES
ALL THE LATEST FASHIONS
GLASS AND STAINLESS STEEL
5*65
0*71
YES
NO <
DATA
PROCESSING
4,51
YES
PACK
PUNCH
6,23
YES
AND
CENTER
POWER
=
>
HYPOTHESIS #
3
IS CONNOTATION OF
APPROPRIATE TYPE GREATER THAN ALL OTHER TYPES?
MESSAGE
Z
ANSWER
THE
CATHEDRAL
NO
ALL THE LATEST FASHIONS
GLASS AND STAINLESS STEEL
DATA PROCESSING CENTER
OLD
NO
NO
PACK
PUNCH
HYPOTHESIS
AND
YES
IS
4
#
TYPE
INAPPROPRIATE
MESSAGE
NO
POWER
CONNOTATION OF
GREATER
THAN
NEUTRAL
Z
THE OLD CATHEDRAL
ALL THE LATEST FASHIONS
GLASS AND STAINLESS STEEL
CENTER
PROCESSING
DATA
PUNCH
PACK
HYPOTHESIS
NEUTRAL
AND
POWER
TYPE
IS
5
*
GREATER
NOT
MESSAGE
CATHEDRAL
THE
OLD
ALL
THE LATEST FASHIONS
AND STAINLESS STEEL
GLASS
DATA
PROCESSING
PACK
PUNCH
AND
CENTER
POWER
1,63
YES
4,10
1,16
YES
NO (=)
3,80
YES
3.66
YES
CONNOTATION
THAN
ALL
TYPE?
ANSWER
OF
OTHER
Z
TYPES?
ANSWER
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
45
TABLE 4
APPROPRIATE
&
NEUTRAL
TYPES
MESSAGE
THE
OLD
COMPARED
TYPEFACE
TO
ALL
OTHER
PALATINO
COOPER
-1.27
1,66
-1.53
(=)
<>)
(<)
UNCIAL.
LATEST
AND
STAINLESS
PROCESSING
PUNCH
AND
(<)
CO
-1,63
(<)
(<)
-5,65
<<)
PALATINO
5.65
(>)
COOPER
UNCIAL
0.53
1.52
(=)
<>)
-5,16
-4.10
(<)
<<)
PRISMA
1,60
<>)
-4,08
<<)
COMPUTER
1.08
<
)
-4,65
<<)
BERNARD
PALATINO
COOPER
-1.47
<<)
(=)
-2,11
<<>
(
)
-1.16
(=)
(=)
-0.58
-0.71
(-=)
<==)
=
-1.98
STEEL
0.71
-0.48
0.14
=
COMPUTER
-0,81
(
=
)
-1.48
<<)
BERNARD
-0.23
(
=
)
-4.89
<<)
CENTER
PALATINO
COOPER
4,51
0.66
(>)
<=>
UNCIAL
PRISMA
-3
82
<<)
0.97
(
)
-3.80
(<)
3,36
<>)
-1.21
-4.51
(=->
<<)
-3.66
(<>
-6.23
=
COMPUTER
PACK
-2.99
-1.66
FASHIONS
UNCIAL
PRISMA
DATA
(<)
.
-0.03
-0,43
BERNARD
GLASS
78
-2
(=)
(=)
PRISMA
COMPUTER
THE
NEUTRAL
APPROPRIATE
CATHEDRAL
BERNARD
ALL
TYPES
.
POWER
BERNARD
2.61
<>)
PALATINO
6.23
(>)
COOPER
UNCIAL
2.97
<>)
-3.48
(<)
<<)
3.03
(>)
(>)
-3.56
(<)
-3.27
CO
PRISMA
COMPUTER
3,22
46
CHAPTER VII
DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS
This
set
study
printing type to
In
message.
in
set
to
by
the
in
For the
proven.
does
the hypothesis
be
For
83% level.
no
that
the
propriate
type
type
is
In addition,
faces.
face
not
we
type
a
a
to
trend,
we
the
must
have
best
must
the
choice
consider
that
message.
is
only
hypothesis
the
it
since
consider
on
that
as
Is
of
valid
there
at
appears
to
and
in
appropriate
the possibility
appropriate
some
for
CENTER"
90% level
messages
selected
emotions
predicted
"DATA PROCESSING
at
be
to
"ALL THE LATEST
POWER"
remaining
We
message
face
hypothesis
hold true
show
the
in
the messages
message
a
stronger
difference between the
significant
appropriate
not
does
it
significance;
this
"PACK PUNCH AND
and
the
that
that
arouse
set
a
were
experimenter
inappropriate
For
cases.
some
be
to
the
of
meaning
stated
will
message
suggests
FASHIONS,"
seems
same
experimenter
The data
true
that message,
the
by
predicted
of
ability
do this five hypotheses
to
face
to
appropriate
compared
contextual
The first hypothesis
type
a
the
research
the
change
order
formulated.
to
out
or
all
certain
of
or
inap
the
messages
factors
47
an
inappropriate type face may
an
appropriate
An
examination
on
the
1.42,
and
Computer,
while
face
selected
toward
response
However,
as
the
is
being
resulted
but
was
selected
results
response
One
feelings
that
show
over
of
information
in
the
raw
for Uncial
that
resulted
the
in
a
direction,
a
response
opposite
this message
"GLASS AND STAINLESS
message
fit itself into easy
face
in
1.44
--
on
direction.
the
other
.
The
to
in the
at
indicates
"pleasant"
inapprop
the
same
score
appropriate
Similar findings hold true for
factors
for
message
for the
score
looking
or
in magnitude,
equal
for this
score
This
-.72.
CATHEDRAL."
"THE OLD
the
evaluative
"good"
the
that
than
score
incongruent.
so
very nearly the
are
inappropriate type
the
nearly
Computer
scores
the
and
respectively.
is
while
shows
Uncial,
in Appendix A,
type
absolute
factor
scores
.78
the message
with
the
of
type,
type,
riate
case
evaluative
appropriate
higher
a
simply because it is
one
This may be the
cause
the
the
about
are
one
no
three
the
the
very
categorization.
the most
subjects
toward
general
not
STEEL"
type
Perhaps
appropriate,
face
gave
does
the
not
the
seem
type
though the
highest
factors.
volunteered
experiment:
message
the
"I'm
following
an
engineer
"GLASS AND STAINLESS
positive.
However,
as
the
and
my
STEEL,"
type
face
48
changed,
so
conclusions
about
appropriate
type
designer
wishes
the
style.
type
feelings."
did my
While
we
cannot
this message based
on
the
face,
to
can
we
communicate
The implications for the
according
certain
The
a
type
face
appropriate
to
compared
by
the
the
hypothesis
same
to
seems
907o level in
direction
further testing
The
other
would
messages
95% for "THE OLD
messages
The
as
is
set
that
that
will
may
a
are
that
for
arouse
while
be
not
message
experimenter
arouse
in
a
this
set
be
to
emotions
stronger
face
type
predicted
This
valid
to be
message
at
the
this
at
over
is
a
76% level;
a
valid
message
shows
trend
perhaps
significant
significant
CATHEDRAL"
and
hypothesis
for the
except
establish
appear
arousal
will
cases
STEEL."
it
vary
neutral.
show
all
"GLASS AND STAINLESS
in this
the
message
to be
of
we
established,
face
type
stated
by
as
may.
that message,
the
data
amount
predicted
to
varied
inappropriate one,
direction
experimenter
The
at
the
the
second
an
the message
first hypothesis
appropriate
than
messages
different, but
in
an
emotions
other
be
can
definitions previously
the
messages
stronger
for
to
predicted
that what
see
draw any
at
high
99.9% for the
level.
levels
other
.
third hypothesis
stated
that
a
message
set
in
a
-
49
face
type
by
predicted
to
that message,
to
the
same
will
message
set
at
trend
in this
Further
icant
with
yet
in
direction,
testing may
subject
his
questionnaire:
hypothesis
this
is
do
at
case
signif
show
from 70% to
range
following
"I
am
a
a
a
86%.
signif
letters),
No
of
being
other
in
a
particular
prove,
seems
The
type
since
that
compared
do
not
is
predicted
that message,
to
the
same
by
the
not
that
will
message
set
in
exhibit
same
any
difficult
a
must
one
arouse
a
faces tested.
type
case.
a
message
to
stronger
a
those
within
(or the
experimenter
arouse
up
one
way."
face
other
stated
the
is
type
all
usually
made
to
seem
This hypothesis
fourth hypothesis
face
to
messages
to
It
letters
type
appropriate
(the
quell
name)
feel that
compared
this
a
me
the
sheet
alarming.
made
)
type
pattern.
response
greater
in those
phrase
other
(not
and
programmer
CENTER"
quite
number
back along
message
computer
found the "DATA PROCESSING
computer-type
riate
the
sent
The remaining
a
it
messages
other
tested.
only in the
true
where
they
as
faces
POWER,"
The
establish
One
phrase
It
99%.
than
greater
feelings
to
to hold
seems
compared
emotions
type
other
appropriate
level.
I
me.
all
"PACK PUNCH AND
the message
icant
in
stronger
be
to
experimenter
arouse
This hypothesis
of
the
type
be
set
in
inapprop
emotions
face
predicted
50
by
the
This hypothesis
all
messages,
be
to
experimenter
was
neutral.
validated
once
except,
which
significance
type
will
face
not
set
We may
in lower
resulted
did
show
It
a
this
direction
clear
that
all
face
--a
type
This may
also
be inferred
Palatino
listed in the
Appendix B
smaller
It
message
the
--
compared
difficult
to
all
of
this
all
--
with
except
messages
STEEL"
also.
tested
types
to
be
than
reactions
somewhat
the
at
a
smaller
all
other
neutral.
scores
the
for
faces
type
of
end
and
mean
say how substituting
experiment.
all
just below the
averages
for "GLASS AND STAINLESS
results
for
comparing
Palatino has both
variance
is
over
type Palatino
emotional
predicted
by
same
the
the
of
stronger
Palatino
the
"GLASS AND STAINLESS
significance.
significantly
neutral
90% level for
the
at
89%
at
in
trend
seems
produce
of
scores
STEEL,"
"GLASS AND STAINLESS
desired level
validated
absolute
to
compared
infer that
also
be
to
in
set
faces tested.
type
was
a message
experimenter
emotions
other
This hypothesis
messages.
the
stronger
all
that
stated
by
predicted
in
of
S8%.
at
arouse
message
"GLASS AND
just below the desired level
was
The fifth, hypothesis
a
90% level for
the
the message
again
STEEL,"
STAINLESS
at
a
.
different
a
STEEL"
would
It is
affect
possible
that
51
this
can
message
change
tested.
is
its
congenial
with
connotation more
several
type
readily than
faces,
other
and
messages
52
CHAPTER VIII
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The
tell
question
the printer,
may be asked,
typesetter,
"What do these
or
buyer
results
type
of
about
*
how to
type?"
select
be that the results
deal
great
faces
only
reflect
were
employees
is
at
before any
Much
based
the
types
do
not
deal
of
full-time
of
more
must
work
principles
the knowledge
There
are
about
are
not
how to
study has
type
subject
of
important to
attempted
the
emotional
through both empirical
Previous
studies
and message
to
seemed
interaction,
to
and
number
the
this
trace
results
and
Technology.
It
be done
face
selection
schools
select
the
concentrating
seem
proper
end.
the
literature
of
non-empirical
the
is
of
experts
connotations
neglect
of
forthcoming.
various
accomplish
a
students
Institute
still
may
have
A limited
in these experiments;
only that it is
face,
This
on
great
research
answer
concerning type face congeniality;
agree
type
a
the
stage
application.
the Rochester
universal
of
such
reactions
intuition.
on
thought
to
used
the
that
clear
of
direct
of
type
At this
aspect
on
printing
works.
of
type
proving that
face
53
a
face in itself does carry
type
In
hypotheses
to
test
face
fill this gap in the
to
order
predictions
to
--
message
and
values,
since
terms
The
valid
rarely
some
were
analyzed
absolute
as
in
defined
was
of
these hypotheses
of
some
significance
the
are
valid
some
salient
point
of
this
connotations
of
messages
face selection,
type
measuring
this
methodology
of
time,
in
and
all
are
cases
few
a
of
large
type
The
still
body
as
of
empirical
and
a
are
sound
methodology for
research
stages
on
results
factors.
While the
for
this
into
of
This
predicted
obtained
one
the
indeed influenced
tested
messages
knowledge
in its early
of
various
responses
of
number
the methodology
extensive
faces
on
a
are
that
has been developed.
for testing
results
is
research
that
and
phenomonen
allows
actual
against
is
and
valid.
emotional
the
type
utilized
neutral.
that
show
designed
inappropriate,
information desired
the
research,
interactions between
various
Scores
connotation.
experiment
an
The hypotheses
desired level
the
The
number
out
face.
type
empirical
appropriate,
point
results
at
tested,
r-
deviations from
of
and
hypotheses.
these
neutral
by
formulated
were
certain
a
was
tended
developing
small,
to
a
establish
more
subject.
type
face
connotations
development.
Eventually
54
this
information, along
developed into
measured
a
given
degree
type
a
system
of
face,
with
which
accuracy,
will
future
will
how
affect
a
a
research
predict,
given
given
may be
a
with
message,
group
of
with
people.
55
CHAPTER IX
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION
A
in
number
need
of
of
faces
at
some
It
wider
use
be
of
on
valuable
subjects,
and
by
The
the
aim
to
to
experiments
for
scheme
of
a
to
the
replicate
range
wider
mind
of
predict
of
arriving
appropriate
communication.
this
investigate the
cultural
are
research
idea in
the
with
this
backgrounds
work
with
a
effects
on
these
.
area
of
for further investigation in this
galvanic
skin
feedback instruments
arousal
on
replicated
classification
socio-economic
An
be
messages,
of
also
range
results
the
and
sort
would
of
should
faces, depending
type
touched
further investigation.
described here
type
areas
brought
about
response
in measuring
by
type
face
and
other
states
usage.
of
subject
biological
emotional
is
56
LIST OF REFERENCES
57
LIST OF REFERENCES
"On
Beaujon, Paul.
the
Mono type Re co r der
,
choice
typefaces."
of
"Atmospharenwert von
Zeitschrift fur angewandte Psychologle,
Drucktypen."
Berliner, Anna.
"The
Brinton, J.E.
Arts, 3 (1961)
'feeling'
of
Sir Cyril.
Cambridge :
type
17
(.1920)
faces."
.
Communication
.
Burns, Aaron.
Typography
Co., 1961.
Burt,
The
1933.
Spring,
New York:
.
Reinhold
Publishing
A Psychological Study of Typography.
Cambridge University Press , 1959
.
Practical Handbook
Butler, Kenneth, and Likeness, George.
on Display Typefaces for Publication Layout.
Mendota,
Illinois :
Butler Typo-Design Research Center, 1959.
Craig, J.
With Type:
Watson-Cuptill
Designing
New York:
Dair, Carl.
Design With Type.
Toronto
Press,
Davis, R.C,
tone
17
a
and
in typography,
1971.
course
Toronto:
University
of
1967.
Smith, H.J.
in type
basic
Publications,
faces."
"Determinants
Journal
of
of
feeling
Applied Psychology,
(1933).
Dowding, Geoffrey.
Wace
London:
in the Choice of Type Faces.
Company, Ltd. , 1957.
Factors
and
ed.
Foster, J. J.
Legibility Abstracts.
and 1971.
1970
Humphries,
,
Lund
London:
society."
Gray, Nicolete.
"Lettering
8 (.Summer, 1974)
and
Haley, Alan.
that
Visible
Language,
.
"Picking
type
readability."
message,
(September, 1977)
.
does
Printing
the
job
to
Impressions
fit
20
,
58
Harrison,
R. , and Morris,
typographical
Research, 1 (1967).
"Communication theory
D.
research."
Haskins,
J.B.
"Testing
editorial
subject
The Journal
of
suitability
matter."
of
typefaces
Journalism
(1958).
Hevner,
"Experimental
K.
of
color
19
(1935).
and
Hlasta, S.C.
studies
lines."
Printing Types
Pittsburgh:
and
the
of
Journal
Carneigie Press,
for
35
Quarterly,
**
value
affective
Applied
Psychology,
n
1
**-
of
Hoy-
and
Typographical
to Use Them.
1950.
*
Intertype Corporation.
How to Select Type Faces.
Brooklyn:
The Intertype Corporation, 1949.
Johnson, Henry.
Printing Type Specimens
Graphic Arts Co.
Kastl, A.J.,
and
Child,
typographical
"Emotional meaning
I.L.
variables."
52
Psychology,
,
The
Boston:
.
1924.
(1968)
Journal
of
of
four
Applied
.
A Historical Investigation of Typographic
Kleper, M.
Morphology 'and Emotional Response Elicitation.
Unpublished Bachelor's Thesis, Rochester Institut e
of Technology,
1969.
Lewis, John.
Typography:
Reinhold
Lucas, D.B.,
A aver t i sing Psychology
Rritt, S.H.
Mc Graw-Hill Book Company,
New York:
and
H.
"The
affective tone of lines:
Psychological Review, 28
researches."
Mac
Pherson, M.
,
and
Panati,
December
Newsweek ,
"An
C.
epitaph
A Tally of Types
Stanley.
C amb r i dg e Un iversity Press, 1973
G.R.
a
University
Inc.,
experimental
(1921)
.
for Sir
Cyril."
Cambridge:
.
An Investigation
the Emotional
an d
20, 1976.
Morrison,
Morrison,
New York:
1964.
Publishing Corporation,
Research.
1950.
Lundholm,
Basic Principles.
Connotation
Microfilms
of
of
.
the
Communic ability
Type.
International,
-Ann
Arbor:
1977.
of
59
Osgood, C.E., Succi, G.J.,
and
Measurement of Meaning.
Illinois Press, 1957.
Ovink ,
G.E.
Tannenbaum, P.H.
Urbana:
University
Legibility, Atmosphere Value,
Leiden:
A.W. Sijhoff,
and
Printed Type.
Poffenberger
A.T.,
,
lines."
of
164
Rehe ,
Forms
of
of
value
(1924).
studies and their impact on
Inland Printer/American Lithog
typography."
modern
rapher,
ot
1938.
Barrows.
"The feeling
Applied Psychology, 8
"Psychological
R.F.
Rehe,
and
Journal
The
(March, 1970),
165
and
1970).
(April,
R.F.
Typography:
How to make it most legible
Indianapolis :
Design Research Publications, I74
.
Ruesch,
J.,
and
Berkeley:
Schiller, G.
color
of
Kees
W.
,
Technique
Nonverbal Communication.
T956.
of California Press,
University
"An
experimental
and
type
in
Applied Psychology,
Snider, J.G.,
and
Osgood,
Tannenbaum, P.H.
,
19
(1935)
C.E.,
A.T.,
cation.
Publishers,
Wendt,
D.
of
Differential
Publishing Co., 1969.
New York:
Hastings
House,
H.K. , and Morris, L.N.
investigation of typeface connotations
Quarterly, 41 (1964)
and
.
Ames:
Iowa State
The Graphics of Communi
Baird, R.N.
Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.,
New York:
Beatrice.
Warde,
Semantic
eds.
Aldine
Legibility of Print.
Tinker, M.A.
University Press, 1963.
Turnbull,
of
.
Jacobson,
experimental
Journalism
appropriatness
Journal
Chicago:
.
the
of
study
advertising."
Spencer, H. The Visible Word.
Publishers, 196.8.
"An
.
The Crystal Goblet.
New York:
World
~~
IzTSW.
"Semantic
differential
of
typefaces
as
a
method
Typographic
research."
congeniality
2 (1968)
Research,
Journal
.
of
60
Werner, H.
John
Wrolstad,
Symbo 1 Formation
Kaplan, B.
and
Inc
1963.
Sons,
Wiley
,
and
.
M.E.
exploring
Quarterly,
Zachrisson, B.
Uppsala:
"Adult
the
37
preferences
function
(I960)
New York;
in typography:
design."
of
.
,
Journalism
.
Studies in the Legibility of Printed Text,
Almqvist and Wiksells Bktryckeri AB, 1965.
61
APPENDICES
62
APPENDIX A
63
APPENDIX A
SUMMARY
MESSAGE
EVALU
POTEN
BERNHARD
PALATINO
0,72
1,05
1.58
UNCIAL
PRISMA
RAW
DATA
ALPHABET
TYPEFACE
COOPER-
OF
ACT IV
AVERG
VARIANCE
0.79
-0.29
1.03
0.11
1.3705
-1,63
-0,58
-0.49
2.3482
56
-0,86
-0.35
-0,19
-1,00
-0.24
1.7118
1.6591
-0,33
-0.82
-0.94
-0.70
1.5630
0.50
-0.34
-0.48
-0.11
1.6833
AVERG
VARIANCE
1.4296
0,74
0.36
0,46
'
-0.42
-0
,
COMPUTER-
ALL
MESSAGE
THE
OLD
1.4474
CATHEDRAL
TYPEFACE PREDICTONS
APPROPRIATE TYPEFACE
UNCIAL
INAPPROPRIATE TYPEFACE
COMPUTER
NEUTRAL TYPEFACE
PALATINO
TYPEFACE
EVALU
POTEN
ACT IV
BERNHARD
0,32
0.98
1.50
0.85
0.89
-0.56
0.08
0.17
1.5522
0.77
-1,52
-0.25
-0.33
2.2656
PALATINO
COOPER-
0,78
-0.25
-0.08
0.15
-0.04
-0.40
-0
52
-0.32
-0.72
-0.70
-0.56
-0.66
1.9309
1.4511
ALL
APPROP
0.35
0.78
-0.32
-0.08
-0.02
1,7281
-0.25
-0.08
0.15
INAPPR
-0.72
-0.70
-0.56
-0.66
1.7392
1.4511
NEUTRL
0.98
-0,56
0.08
0.17
1.5522
UNCIAL
PRISMA
COMPUTER
?
1
.
7392
64
MESSAGE
-
ALL
THE
LATEST
FASHIONS
TYPEFACE
PREDICTONS
APPROPRIATE TYPEFACE
BERNHARD
INAPPROPRIATE TYPEFACE
UNCIAL
NEUTRAL TYPEFACE
PALATINO
TYPEFACE
EVALU
BERNHARD
POTEN
ACT IV
AVERG
VARIANCE
0,78
1,47
0,20
0.82
1.7347
PALATINO
0,69
-0,23
-0,06
0.13
0.9789
COOPER
0.67
-1.33
-0.90
-0.52
1.9429
UNCIAL
PRISMA
0.03
0,76
-0,28
-0,64
-0
30
1.8637
-0,30
-1.11
-0.22
1.8614
-0.37
-0,80
-0.96
-0.71
1.5242
ALL
0.43
-0,24
-0
58
-0.13
1.6510
APPROP
0,78
1,47
0,20
0,82
1.7347
INAPPR
0,03
-0,28
-0.64
-0.30
1.8637
NEUTRL
0,69
-0
23
-0.06
0.13
0.9789
'
?
COMPUTER-
MESSAGE
TYPEFACE
GLASS
STEEL
STAINLESS
PREDICTONS
APPROPRIATE
PRISMA
TYPEFACE
INAPPROPRIATE
NEUTRAL
AND
,
?
TYPEFACE
TYPEFACE
COOPER
PALATINO
TYPEFACE
EVALU
POTEN
ACT IV
AVERG
VARIANCE
BERNHARD
0.71
1.43
0,4.1
0.85
1.5058
PALATINO
0.95
-0,65
-0.53
-0.08
1.7891
COOPER
UNCIAL
0.78
-1,43
-0.53
-0.39
1.8386
0.16
-0,27
-0.67
-0.26
1.6757
PRISMA
0,80
-0,43
-0.90
-0.19
1.7893
-0.04
-0,98
-0.95
-0.66
1
ALL
0.56
-0,40
-0.53
-0.12
1.6948
APPROP
0.80
-0,48
-0.90
-0.19
1,7893
INAPPR
0.78
-1,43
-0,53
-0.39
1.8386
-0,53
-0,08
1.7891
COMPUTER
NEUTRL
0,95
-0,65
?
5705
65
MESSAGE
CENTER
PROCESSING
DATA
TYPEFACE
PREDICTONS
APPROPRIATE TYPEFACE
INAPPROPRIATE TYPEFACE
N E U T R A I...
T YPEFACE
COMPUTER
UNCIAL
PA L ATI N 0
TYPEFACE
EVALU
POTEN
ACTIV
AVERG
VARIANCE
BERNHARD
0,44
1.66
0.63
0.91
1.4769
PALATINO
0
55
-0.54
-0.36
-0.12
1.1947
COOPER
0,68
-1.58
-0,59
-0.50
1.9017
UNCIAL
-0,57
-0.48
-0.52
-a.
52
1.6311
PRISMA
0,58
-0.42
-0.30
-0.21
1.3745
COMPUTER-
0,25
-0,76
-1,13
-0.55
2.0312
ALL
0,32
-0.35
-0.46
-0.16
1.6017
APPROP
0,25
-0,76
-1.13
-0.55
2.0312
INAPPR
-0,57
-0.48
-0,52
-0.52
1.6311
NEUTRL
0,55
-0.54
-0.36
-0.12
1.1947
MESSAGE
TYPEFACE
,
PACK
POWER
AND
PREDICTONS
APPROPRIATE
COOPER
TYPEFACE
TYPEFACE
INAPPROPRIATE
NEUTRAL
PUNCH
TYPEFACE
BERNHARD
PALATINO
POTEN
TYPEFACE
EVALU
BERNHARD
-0.30
1.44
PALATINO
AVERG
VARIANCE
0,59
0.53
1,9325
-0.20
-0.10
1.3557
ACTIV
0.2S
-0.37
COOPER-
0.63
-1.83
-1.02
-0.76
2.5991
UNCIAL
-0.38
-0.46
-0.74
-0.53
1.8126
PRISMA
0.38
-0.88
-1.16
-0.55
1.7205
1.3381
-0.43
-1.08
-0.94
-0.82
ALL
0.03
-0.54
-0.58
-0,36
APPROP
0.63
-1.88
-1.02
-0,76
COMPUTER-
INAPPR
NEUTRL
1.7931
-0.30
1.44
0.59
0,58
2.5991
1.9325
28
-0.37
-0.20
-0,10
1.3557
0
.
66
APPENDIX B
67
APPENDIX
SUMMARY
MESSAGE
OF
B
ABSOLUTE
DATA
ALPHABET
TYPEFACE
EVALU
POTEN
1,15
1.18
BERNHARD
ACTIV
VERG
VARIANCE
1.29
0.8442
0.67
0,83
0,96
1.26
0.6839
1.0091
0.7131
1.58
PALATINO
UNCIAL
1.30
0.68
1 . 63
0.96
0,92
1.06
PRISMA
1.30
0.65
1.04
1.00
0.7250
COMPUTER
1
39
0.90
1,10
1.13
0.7714
ALL
1.23
1.07
0,99
1.09
0.7920
AVERG
VARIANCE
COOPER-
MESSAGE
THE
TYPEFACE
,
OLD
PREDICTIONS
APPROPRIATE
UNCIAL
TYPEFACE
COMPUTER-
TYPEFACE
INAPPROPRIATE
NEUTRAL
CATHEDRAL
TYPEFACE
PALATINO
POTEN
ACTIV
TYPEFACE
EVALU
BERNHARD
1.02
1,50
1,01
1.18
0.8371
PALATINO
1.28
0
72
0,66
0.89
0.7938
COOPER-
1,17
1,54
0.91
1,21
0.9206
UNCIAL
1
0,89
0,32
1
05
0.6592
PRISMA
1 .44
1.42
0,74
1.10
0,83
0.86
1,09
1.05
0.7772
1,29
1,04
0,89
1,08
0.8043
1,05
0,6592
COMPUTER-
ALL
.44
,
.
0.8380
APPROP
1,44
0,89
0,82
INAPPR
1,42
0,88
0,86
1.05
0.7772
66
0,89
0.7938
NEUTRL
1
,
28
0
,
72
0
,
68
MESSAGE
-
ALL
THE
LATEST
FASHIONS
TYPEFACE PRED I CT I ONS
APPROPR I ATE TYPEFACE
BERNHARD
INAPPROPRIATE TYPEFACE
UNCIAL
NEUTRAL TYPEFACE
PALATINO
TYPEFACE
EVALU
POTEN
BERNHARD
PALATINO
1.18
PRISMA
0.95
1.07
1.39
1,34
1.49
0.47
1.41
0.86
0.60
COMPUTER
1.35
0.94
ALL
1.21
0.96
APPROP
INAPPR
NEUTRL
1,13
1.49
1.39
0.95
COOPER-
UNCIAL
MESSAGE
TYPEFACE
GLASS
AVERG
VARIANCE
0.8723
0.5160
1.04
1.24
0.66
0.69
1,06
0.98
1.18
1.08
1.27
1,07
1.08
1.12
0.8209
0.7925
0.7634
0.7665
1.01
1.06
0.7553
1.04
1.24
0.8723
0.86
0.98
0.47
0.66
1.08
0.69
0.7925
0.5160
AVERG
VARIANCE
STAINLESS
STEEL
PREDICTIONS
APPROPRIATE
PRISMA
TYPEFACE
INAPPROPRIATE
NEUTRAL
AND
ACTIV
TYPEFACE
TYPEFACE
COOPER-
PALATINO
TYPEFACE
EVALU
POTEN
ACTIV
BERNHARD
1.09
1.65
0.91
1
0.7383
.'?'?
0.7481
PALATINO
1.23
0.81
COOPER-
1.02
0.97
1.51
1.00
0.83
1.12
0.7389
UNCIAL
PRISMA
1.34
0.85
1.06
0.6197
1.22
1.28
1.07
1.15
0.6746
COMPUTER-
0.86
1.10
0.99
1,14
1
.
07
0.6792
ALL
1.20
1,16
0.96
1.10
0.7081
APPROP
1.22
1 . 02
1.23
0.86
1.51
0.97
1.14
1.07
0.6746
0,83
1,12
0.7389
0.81
1.00
0.7883
INAPPR
NEUTRL
69
MESSAGE
DATA
PROCESSING
CENTER
TYPEFACE PREDICTIONS
APPR0P R I ATE
TYPE F AC E
C0MPUTER
INAPPROPRIATE TYPEFACE
NEUTRAL TYPEFACE
TYPEFACE
UNCIAL
PALATINO
EVALU
POTEN
ACTIV
AVERG
VARIANCE
1.07
0,64
0.81
1,24
0.78
BERNHARD
PALATINO
COOPER
UNCIAL
PRISMA
1.00
1.66
0.99
0,70
1.00
1.64
1.15
0.7591
0.6051
0.8258
1.47
1.00
0.74
0.90
0,90
1.12
0.6431
0,96
1,27
0.89
1.22
0.6338
0.8416
0.96
COMPUTER-
1.49
ALL
1.15
1.11
0,94
1
07
0.7131
APPROP
1.49
0.90
1,27
1.22
INAPPR
NEUTRL
1.47
1.00
0.70
0
1.12
0.78
0.8416
0.6431
0.6051
AVERG
VARIANCE
MESSAGE
0.99
PACK
PUNCH
,
90
0,64
.
POWER-
AND
TYPE F A C E P R E D I C T IONS
APPR0PR I ATE T YPEFACE
COOPER
INAPPROPRIATE TYPEFACE
BERNHARD
PALATINO
NEUTRAL TYPEFACE
ACTIV
TYPEFACE
EVALU
POTEN
BERNHARD
PALATINO
0.92
0.76
1,62
1,05
1.20
0,89
0,84
0,83
0.8330
0.6761
COOPER-
1
.
23
1,88
1.34
1,48
0.9714
UNCIAL
PRISMA
1
.
36
1,10
1,04
1,17
0.7289
1.14
1,02
34
1.17
0.6656
COMPUTER-
1,19
1,12
1,12
1.14
0.6978
.1
,
ALL
1.10
1,27
1,12
1,16
0,7621
APPROP
1.23
1
83
1,34
1.48
INAPPR
0,92
0,76
1,62
1,05
1,20
0,89
0,84
0,83
0.9714
0.8330
0.6761
NEUTRL
,
70
AVERAGES BY TYPEFACE FOR ALL MESSAGES
EVALU
POTEN
BERNHARD
PALATINO
05
COOPER
UNCIAL
11
38
1.58
. 74
1.60
0.94
PRISMA
23
0.77
1.35
0.97
06
COMPUTER
AVERAGES
FOR
ALL
ACTIV
0
MESSAGES
EXCEPT
VERG
VARIANCE
1.05
1,23
0.8157
0,71
0,99
0,84
1 , 23
0.6780
0.8812
0,94
1,09
0.6928
1,14
1,08
1.05
1.14
0.7167
0 . 7556
ALPHABET
EVALU
POTEN
ACTIV
VERG
VARIANCE
ALL
1.19
1,11
0.99
1.10
0.7496
APPROP
1.31
1.20
1,12
1.21
INAPPR
NEUTRL
1
24
1.17
0,92
1.11
0,8038
0,7569
75
0.72
0.84
0.6759
.
1.04
0
.
71
APPENDIX C
72
APPENDIX C
TEST BOOKLET
73
r*
5
*
*t-i
as
!^
r
4J
v
bo
"
in
in
U
4J
>
V
bO '2
rt
3
C
4J
V
rt
-a
-c
c
be
be
5
?
3
qj
3
a
11
?
rt
-a!
<u
rt
rt
u
OJ
v
as
bo
.S
~
^
W
C
X
In
C/3
rt
J3
o
be
c
fi,
c
3
u
rt
rt
u
3
o
Si
>s
rt
X
J3
-.
rt
s
.a
h.
rt
T3
C
rt
u
2
bfi
h
S- 8,
>-
c
c
u
rt
.J
rt
o
3 *
5
u
c
h
u
>
"as
3
o
i-
.
>-
re
u
<u
c
-
>
CJ
S"
hi
s. "^
be -j
z
u
as
u
C
*-
C
4J
a
j)
g
*
rt
>
rt
rt
rt
3
"O
'u
*
as
u
cn
4J
*>
S3
rt
c
*j
2 X
*
7=
as
>
c
c
rt
'
^
be "51
=3
as
z
?
rt
3
O
.41
W
u
rt
3
-S
O
"a
o
"
>-
>
w
3
.s
5
>
4J
e
s>
^
d
S
w
'as
as
V
*
c
E
-
?
rt
5
x
U
JS
u
"2
be
3
o
flj
as
*->
C
-3
rt
U
^
"rt
5
3
E
g>
CL IS
JC
4J
u
3
C
>bo
4i
rt
b
Q
O
O
oj
-=
bo
3
H ^2
u
rt
rt
-o
c
a
3X
j-i
as
a
bo
c
>S
"3
a
3
J2
faa
V
a
o
n=
s
3
4J
5j
'>
as
be
3
c
-**1
rm*
74
H
Q
Q
Z
<
O
0
w
<
o
O
o
<
>
U
<
ID
W
O
z
s
<
J
ft.
z
era
Um
CC
D
D
D
D
D
?
?
D
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
D
D
?
D
?
?
?
?
D
?
?
?
?
D
?
?
?
D
?
?
?
?
?
?
D
D
?
UJ
O
Z
5BM
H
W
Z
<
h
<
<LfX
<
-J
0-
Q
<
h---|
>
W
W
Q
X
<
>
CD
C/J
<
X
ft*
UJ
75
h
Q
Q
z
<
0
O
UJ
CO
<
O
UJ
<
W
o
>
r-i
h
U
<
^4
w
e*
o
z
s
-J
<
u
z
D
pnaaj
P^
H
D
D
D
D
D
a
D
D
?
D
D
a
?
?
?
a
D
?
?
?
?
a
D
?
?
?
?
a
a
a
c*
h
?
?
?
?
a
?
<
?
D
?
a
D
D
UJ
o
z
U
CD
CD
W
U
O
H
<
Q
h
UJ
z
<
h
CO
u
<
<
1(
>
>
<
-J
Q
<
UJ
UJ
ft.
CQ
Q
X
UJ
>
<
*t
CO
CO
<
u
X
UJ
76
h
Q
Q
z
<
O
O
w
co
O
m
<
UJ
O
UJ
UJ
>
>1
to4
h
<
CC
o
z
J
J
<
<J
z
<
D
?
D
?
D
?
o
?
?
?
?
D
?
D
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
D
?
?
?
?
?
?
D
?
?
?
?
D
D
?
D
?
?
D
?
?
UJ
o
Z
o
-V
tain
H
W
Z
<
<
CO
U
>
?J
J
Q
<
>
<
UJ
UJ
ft.
CQ
Q
X
<
UJ
14-
>
H
CO
CO
CJ
<
X
ft,
UJ
77
h
Q
Q
ui
UJ
Z
<
C
0
UJ
<
>
CO
o
<
U)
O
o
D
UJ
-I
O
z
H
U
cd
<
<
ft,
Z
-J)
c
o
D
D
D
D
D
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
a
a
a
?
a
?
?????
g
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
?
a
?
d
P
P
a
H
<
o
UJ
H
Z
UJ
<
CO
<
J
a
<
ft*
CQ
UJ
>
<
UJ
UJ
Q
X
>
Z
H
CO
CO
u
<
X
ft.
UJ
78
H
Q
Q
ui
UJ
Z
O
o
UJ
<
>
<
CO
<
O
UJ
O
o
UJ
>*
<
c<
?J
O
z
?<
<
u
ft-
Z
D
?
?
D
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
D
?
?
D
?
D
D
?
D
?
?
D
?
D
?
?
?
?
D
?
D
?
D
?
?
?
?
?
?
UJ
O
z
CC
uu
fmmSSBt
LU
UJ
Z
<
h
CO
U
<
>1
UJ
>
>
<
Q
<
UJ
UJ
-J
ft.
33
Q
X
>
14
CO
CO
i
<
X
Cu
UJ
79
H
Z
<
CO
<
Q
Q
X
UJ
O
O
O
UJ
<
>
z
O
O
UJ
O
UJ
**
H
CJ
CC
?J
<
<
cu
Z
D
Z
D
D
D
?
?
D
D
D
?
?
?
a
a
a
d
a
?
?
a
d
?
a
a
a
?
a
?
a
?
?
?
a
a
a
?
a
a
a
a
a
?
?
CO
CO
u
a
<
a
H
UJ
Z
<
h
<
>*
CO
u
>
<
11
-J
Q
<
ft.
CQ
uj
O
UJ
4
UJ
UJ
P
X
z
>
co
co
n
Cj
<
**
UJ
CU
80
H
Z
<
CO
<
Q
O
o
o
UJ
Q
UJ
O
o
X
<
UJ
>
o
z
*-4
UJ
u
s
J
<
cc
-J
ft.
Z
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
?
?
?
D
?
D
D
?
D
?
?
?
?
?
D
?
D
D
?
?
?
D
?
?
?
D
?
D
?
?
?
?
?
?
UJ
O
Z
UJ
H
z
<
<
co
U
Q
<
>
<
UJ
UJ
CQ
Q
X
<
UJ
-J
>
CO
CO
c_>
<
X
0-
UJ
81
h
Q
Q
Z
<
O
0
UJ
CO
<
O
UJ
X
<
UJ
o
UJ
>
><
H
u
<
CC
o
z
-J
<
o
_J
ft.
Z
3
n
a
a
?
?
?
a
a
a
a
a
?
a
?
?
?
a
o
a
?
a
?
d
?
a
?
a
a
a
a
?
?
?
a
?
?
a
d
a
n
a
a
UJ
o
Z
UJ
eo
<
uj
a,
*
h
<
Z
<
"H
Q
>
<
<
UJ
UJ
CQ
Q
X
>
>-H
CO
CO
u
<
X
Oh
UJ
82
z
<
Q
Q
X
UJ
0
0
UJ
<
>
O
O
O
o
z
UJ
s
u
P
-J
<
fti
<
z
EC
LU
?
D
D
?
r
D
D
*
7"
UU
?
D
D
D
?
D
Iss&hkI
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
?
D
D
D
?
?
?
D
D
Ul
z
Q3
C_3
_
,
gat
bsbshb
Z
H
<
<
>
CO
c_>
>
<
<
Q
<
UJ
Ui
-J
ft-
CQ
a
X
UJ
>
e
CO
C/5
<
X
ft-
UJ
83
Q
Q
Z
<
O
o
UJ
x
<
O
UJ
CO
o
<
o
>
z
>-H
s
O
D
UJ
UJ
CC
<
<
-J
Oh
z
D
D
D
?
?
?
?
?
?
D
?
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
?
'?
?
?
?
?
?
?
D
D
D
D
D
?
D
?
?
?
D
?
D
?
?
?
H
C
UJ
H
Z
<
Ul
<
<
UJ
.
J
<
a-
CQ
>
y
>
<
UJ
UJ
Q
X
Z
H
CO
CO
D
<
X
ft.
UJ
84
Q
Q
X
UJ
z
<
O
O
UJ
<
>
CO
o
h
<
n9
O
O
D
UJ
**
u
o
z
--J
UJ
<
J
CJ
0-
Z
D
?
?
?
D
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
D
D
D
?
?
?
?
?
?
D
?
D
?
D
D
D
?
d
a
a
a
a
?
?
a
a
a
?
UJ
O
Z
H
UJ
Z
<
H
<
CO
U
<
UJ
ft-
><
>
<
a
J
<
UJ
UJ
CQ
Q
X
>
N-4
CO
co
<J
<
X
ft-
UJ
h
Q
Q
X
UJ
Z
<
O
O
UJ
<
>
CO
o
<
ui
O
O
UJ
*-4
z
h
u
<
oi
o
ft.
-J
<
u
in
Z
D
o
n
n
?
?
?
a
CQ
a
a
a
a
a
?
a
d
?
a
a
a
a
?
a
d
a
a
a
d
a
d
?
a
a
a
a
?
a
a
a
?
?
?
a
d
01
LtU
I
<
<
H
Z
h
<
<
UJ
V
co
<
O
UJ
>
>
J
<
UJ
'UJ
-J
Q
<
ft,
CQ
Q
X
UJ
>
CO
CO
z
H
(J
<
X
ft.
UJ
86
h
Q
Q
X
UJ
Z
<
O
O
UJ
<
>
CO
<
O
UJ
O
UJ
O
I(
H
CJ
oi
J
O
z
<
<
Oh
z
D
D
D
?
?
?
?
?
?
D
?
?
?
?
D
?
?
D
a
?
?
d
a
?
?
a
d
?
a
?
a
?
d
?
d
?
?
?
a
a
a
?
u
UJ
O
z
<
<
><
CO
(J
>
<
,1
1
0S
a
<
CQ
-J
<
UJ
Ui
a
X
UJ
>
CO
CO
z
IT1
h
*-4
<J
<
X
Ch
UJ
h
Q
a
X
UJ
Z
<
O
o
O
UJ
<
>
UJ
f
CO
<
UJ
O
o
D
J
4
O
z
?-4
H
U
<
J
S
<
-J
0-
Z
D
D
a
D
a
a
a
D
a
a
a
a
D
D
a
?
a
a
D
D
a
?
?
?
a
D
a
?
a
a
a
D
a
?
a
a
c
?
a
?
?
a
D
hJ
<
&
X
<;
u
?J
o
w
X
H
h
UJ
Z
<
h
<
u
>*
Q
<
UJ
UJ
CQ
a
X
CO
<
UJ
ft-
a
UJ
>
<
>
CO
CO
<
z
*-4
H
U
X
UJ
88
h
Q
z
<
O
CO
O
<
UJ
Q
X
UJ
UJ
<
>
O
O
UJ
*-4
<
oi
14
h
u
D
O
z
-J
<
u
-J
ft.
Z
3
1
B
11
II
II
D
D
D
D
D
D
?
D
?
?
?
?
D
?
?
D
?
?
?
?
?
?
D
D
?
?
?
D
?
?
?
?
?
d
a
a
a
?
?
a
a
a
UJ
O
Z
UJ
h
z
<
CO
<
a
CQ
<
>-
y
j
>
<
UJ
UJ
a
X
>
co
CO
>-H
h-1
U
<
X
0-
UJ
89
h
Q
Q
Z
<
O
O
UJ
CO
<
O
w
O
O
3
X
<
UJ
UJ
>
H
U
<
X
O
z
2s
-J
<
V
J
ft.
Z
3
D
D
D
?
?
D
D
?
?
?
?
?
D
D
D
D
?
?
?
?
?
?
D
?
?
?
?
?
?
a
a
?
a
a
a
a
a
?
a
a
a
a
l-M
^B$
{^
UJ
UJ
<
CO
<
O
H
Z
<
h-4
>
<
J
a
<
UJ
UJ
a-
CQ
Q
X
UJ
>
CO
CO
z
*-~4
-<
CJ
<
X
a.
UJ
90
Q
Q
X
UJ
z
<
0
0
UJ
<
>
CO
a
<
^-4
h
s
u
<
X
J
_
UJ
^4-
UJ
c*
O
O
O
Z
*-4
<
CJ
o-
z
^J
tf
^
a
a
a
?
?
a
o
*
a
?
n
?
a
a
n
D
D
a
D
a
D
a
D
a
?
D
a
a
?
a
?
D
Q*
a
a
a
a
?
D
u
D
a
?
D
a
a
c
<
c
h
*-4*
UJ
.
Z
<
<
CO
<J
<
UJ
a.
Q
<
CQ
UJ
>
>
-3
<
UJ
UJ
a
X
>
CO
CO
o
z
H
*-4
CJ
<
X
ft.
UJ
91
N
Q
Q
X
UI
o
Z
<
o
o
uJ
<
>
z
CO
o
<
UJ
O
o
UJ
?-H
H
cj
D
X
s
-J
<
<
CJ
-J
ft.
Z
>
ID
a
a
a
a
a
a
?
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
?
?
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
?
?
d
d
d
?
a
D
D
a
a
d
?
?
a
H
CD
a
Ph
o
E
O
W
Q
U
PQ
<
o
UJ
z
H
<
<
U
>
j
a
<
UJ
UJ
0.
CQ
Q
X
Vi
<
u
UI
>
<
>
Z
r
.
CO
CO
<
X
ft.
UJ
92
z
<
CO
<
Q
Q
X
UJ
O
o
O
UJ
<
>
z
CJ
3
O
UJ
O
UJ
O
3
X
<
<
CJ
-J
ft.
CD
4
Z
3
D
D
?
n
D
?
D
?
D
n
D
?
D
?
?
n
D
?
D
?
?
D
D
?
D
?
?
D
D
?
w
?
?
?
D
?
?
H
?
?
?
?
?
?
o
-*l^
X
CD
<
Ph
H
CD
W
H
<
hJ
K-t-"-!
-J
<
h
o
UJ
z
<
<
CO
V
<
l-H
UJ
1t
>
<
X
ft*
UJ
UJ
UJ
-J
Q
<
ft-
CQ
Q
X
Li]
p*4
z
>
>
<
>
CO
CO
H
?*
CJ
93
Q
Q
Z
O
UJ
<
o
CO
o
<
X
<
O
O
O
>
Z
l-H
UJ
H
U
D
<
X
UJ
UJ
ft.
Z
3
P4
W
O
Ph
Q
Ph
u
<
Ph
n
a
?
?
?
?
a
a
a
a
?
a
a
a
?
a
a
a
a
?
d
?
D
D
a
a
?
d
?
?
a
d
a
d
?
d
d
a
a
?
a
?
H
H
UJ
UJ
<
CJ
CO
<
o
UJ
z
<
1-H
a
-J
<
UJ
ft.
CQ
a
>
>
<
UJ
X
Z
i
-
11
CO
CO
U
<
X
ft.
UJ
94
h
Q
Q
X
UJ
Z
O
o
UJ
<
>
<
co
<
o
UJ
C
C*
s
\ge0r
O
a
D
UJ
z
4
r
i,
CJ
<
X
O
-J
-J
<
fty.
a
a
D
D
D
D
D
a
a
?
a
D
n
a
a
?
a
a
a
D
?
?
D
D
?
D
D
D
D
a
a
?
D
D
a
D
D
a
a
D
a
?
0>
f*
fc
y>
<J>
$
u
o
^
y
<
V
H
UJ
Z
<
H
CO
<
UJ
ft.
o
<
>*
(J
*>
r^
+
a
<
>
<
UJ
UJ
CQ
a
X
i
UJ
z
H
CO
CO
l-H
<
X
Oh
UJ
u
95
h
Q
Q
Z
<
0
c
UJ
CO
<
O
X
<
UJ
>
**
r
CJ
<
CC
O
z
*-4
.
r-
o
UJ
UJ
-J
s
<
<J
Oh
z
D
n
?
?
D
D
a
?
D
?
a
D
D
?
D
?
n
D
<
n
?
?
?
D
?
r1
D
D
?
?
?
?
c>
?
?
?
?
a
D
D
?
D
D
a
a
UJ
o
z
-J
<
t
H
UJ
Z
<
H
<
CO
<
UJ
Q
<
Oh
CQ
y
>
>
j
<
UJ
UJ
Q
X
>
1^
CO
CO
l-H
H
l-H
<
a
X
ft.
UJ
96
H
Q
Q
X
UJ
Z
<
O
O
UJ
<
>
UJ
CO
O
O
o
<
UJ
II
U
<
D
X
z
J
CJ
J
ft.
Z
D
D
D
?
D
?
?
?
?
D
?
?
?
?
D
D
?
?
D
D
?
?
?
?
a
a
a
d
a
a
a
?
?
a
a
d
a
a
?
?
?
d
a
ui
a
z
H
UI
Z
H
<
<
>*
CO
CJ
<
J-4
UJ
a
<
>
<
UJ
UJ
cu
CQ
Q
X
>
l-H
CO
CO
1<
H
?4
<
X
cu
ua
97
h
Z
<
CO
<
Q
Q
X
UI
O
o
UJ
<
>
O
U)
O
O
UJ
1-H
h
CJ
X
o
z
l-H
s
<
<
-J
Oh
W
W
z
D
H
D
D
?
D
D
D
?
?
D
?
D
?
?
D
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
D
D
?
?
?
D
?
D
?
CD
CD
D
?
?
?
D
?
<
h
UJ
z
<
h
<
o
Z
>-
UJ
CO
CJ
>
CD
CD
CD
_J
?
W
.-J
CD
O
<
l-H
<
-]
Q
<
UJ
UJ
0-
CQ
Q
X
UJ
>
?
l-H
H
CO
CO
U
<
X
ft.
UI
98
z
<
zr.
<
Q
Q
X
UJ
0
0
UJ
<
>
o
u;
O
O
UI
h
<
X
O
z
-J
<
CJ
-J
z
D
D
D
D
D
D
?
D
?
?
D
?
?
D
D
D
D
D
a
?
d
a
d
?
a
?
d
d
a
d
?
a
?
a
a
?
d
?
d
?
d
a
O
UJ
z
UJ
<
<
>
co
CJ
>
<
i
Q
<
CQ
i
>
^1
*-4
H
>-4
<
CO
CO
Ul
UJ
X
a
X
<
i-M
UJ
-J
U
h
Q
a
X
UJ
z
<
o
o
UJ
<
>
CO
<
o
UJ
O
O
UJ
*-4
h
<
X
o
z
s
-J
<
CJ
-J
0-
Z
D
?
n
D
D
?
?
?
D
?
?
?
?
D
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
D
D
?
D
?
?
?
?
D
?
?
D
D
N
D
H
UJ
Z
<
H
CO
CJ
<
NH
<
-j
Q
<
o-
CQ
UJ
O
UJ
-J
>
>
<
UI
UJ
Q
X
Z
N-*
P
CO
CO
cj
<
X
0-
UJ
100
z
<
co
<
Q
Q
O
O
UJ
o
uj
O
O
X
<
UJ
o
z
N-4
cj
<
X
J
w
>
s
-J
<
u
o-
Z
D
CO
D
?
D
?
d
?
d
a
?
a
a
a
?
?
?
d
a
?
D
?
?
D
?
?
?
?
D
?
D
D
?
D
D
?
?
a
d
a
a
n
?
UJ
O
Z
CO
CjO
Q
Z
<
CO
h
UJ
Z
<
H
<
CO
l-H
>
<
i
Q
<
UJ
UJ
0-
CQ
Q
X
<
Ul
,
>
?4
N-4
co
CO
N-4
u
<
X
ft.
UJ
101
h
z
<
CO
<
Q
Q
x
o
o
ui
O
UJ
>
UJ
UJ
O
D
p
O
z
N4
-J
<
oi
<
u
J
ft.
Z
3
D
D
?
D
D
D
D
D
?
?
Q
D
D
D
D
?
D
anna
D
?
a
?
?
a
d
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
d
?
?
a
H
O
UI
h
Z
<
UJ
<
CO
cj
<
l-H
>
J
ul
UJ
-J
Q
<
>
<
e-
CQ
a
X
UJ
Z
H
CO
CO
<
X
ft-
UJ
102
h
Q
Q
Z
<
0
o
UJ
CO
<
o
UJ
O
O
X
<
UJ
>
UJ
o
z
>
NH
f
s
J
<
X
<
?J
u
ft.
Z
3
1mmH
ffiwaf!
LU
?
D
D
?
D
D
*
BSU&B
CL
' '
?
D
D
D
D
D
?
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
?
?
?
?
a
?
d
?
a
?
a
a
d
a
a
D
D
D
D
D
?
UJ
o
z
''win
r i
NE
Jan
P 1
IT"
n
Lin
H
UI
Z
<
h
CO
CJ
<
?1
UJ
<
>
>
<
Q
J
<
UJ
UJ
0-
CQ
Q
X
>
Ir
N-4
*i
H
CO
CO
cj
l-H
<
X
Oh
UJ
103
N
y
X
h
Q
Q
x,
UJ
n
z
<
O
o
UJ
<
>
z
UJ
f
CO
o
<
UI
O
o
D
N-4
.
CJ
X
-s
<
<
D
D
ft.
Z
3
>
D
D
D
D
D
#
iy>
D
?
?
a
D
D
D
?
D
a
D
D
D
?
D
D
a
a
?
?
?
D
D
D
)
?
?
?
a
a
?
<J)
?
?
a
a
D
D
UJ
a
z
y
G
n
/*
N.
>
1
V
n
u
CD
<
h
UJ
Z
<
h
<
><
CO
CJ
<
NH
>
UJ
_J
<
<
UJ
UI
CQ
a
X
0-
>
CO
CO
l-H
h
l-H
CJ
<
X
Oh
UJ
104
h
a
z
<
CO
<
r~\
o
UI
M
Q
X
UJ
UJ
<
>
O
O
UJ
N-4
N-4
H
U
<
X
o
z
-J
<
CJ
1-J
0-
Z
D
D
D
D
D
?
D
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
D
?
D
?
?
?
?
D
?
?
D
D
?
D
?
?
D
?
D
D
?
?
LU
?
?
-D
?
?
?
LJ
h
UJ
Z
<
r-
CO
CJ
<
*<
cn
V SB
CD
EH
U-
d3
<
-J
p
<
o-
CQ
UJ
O
Ui
>
>
>
l-H
l-H
H
CJ
l-H
-4
<
CO
CO
UI
ui
X
<
X
Q
Oh
UJ
105
h
Q
Q
z
<
o
o
UJ
CO
o
<
ui
O
O
X
<
UJ
>
NH
h
u
<
X
-
UJ
O
z
W-4
-s
<
CJ
-J
0-
Z
D
n
n
n
d
d
?
D
?
?
D
D
?
?
?
?
D
D
?
D
D
?
C
?
?
?
?
?
D
?
?
?
?
?
?
D
?
?
?
?
D
?
UJ
z
M
o
-59P
H
UJ
Z
<
h
co
CJ
<
l-H
ul
<
>
>
J
<
co
CO
r;
cj
UJ
<
X
X
ft.
UJ
J
<
UI
ft.
CQ
Q
106
H
Q
Q
X
UJ
O
Z
O
O
UI
<
>
z
CO
<
O
UJ
UJ
c
1-H
h
U
<.
oi
-J
<
CJ
?J
Oh
z
p
>
3
?
?
?
D
D
?
?
?
?
?
?
a
a
d
a
a
a
a
a
d
?
d
?
D
a
n
d
d
d
d
n
a
a
a
d
d
D
D
D
D
D
D
UJ
z
P
-!>
a
c
X
h
UJ
z
<
<
y
CO
<
u
>
>
j
uj
UJ
-I
Q
<
<
ft.
CQ
Q
X
UI
>
l-H
N-H
H
N*
CO
CO
J
<
X
ft-
UJ
107
H
Q
Q
Z
<
0
o
UJ
CO
<
o
UJ
O
O
X
<
UJ
UJ
>
r
<J
<
X
-J
o
z
1-H
J
u
Oh
z
D
_J
1 u
UJ
sana
D
n
D
D
D
D
?
D
D
?
D
?
?
D
D
?
D
?
?
?
?
D
cn
CD
cn
LU
j
ZE
?
U2
era
U2
u
?
?
D
?
D
?
?
?
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
?
UJ
Z
<
H
CO
CJ
<
<
-J
>
<
UJ
UJ
Q
X
NH
-J
Q
<
ft.
CQ
UJ
O
UJ
>
CO
CO
z
l-H
l-H
CJ
<
X
a.
UJ
108
z
<
CO
Q
Q
O
o
UJ
O
O
o
<
X
<
UJ
ui
O
>
z
l-H
ui
h
s
<
X
-J
ft.
z
a
a
d
d
d
a
a
a
n
n
a
d
a
z
D
D
D
D
D
a
d
a
a
?
?
?
n
a
a
n
d
d
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
d
a
n
UJ
o
z
<
U
H
UJ
H
Z
<
<
CO
CJ
<
l-H
ul
1
C-4
>
>
>
*i
<
CO
CO
u
Q
<
UJ
Ul
<
X
CQ
a
X
Cu
ui
109
H
Q
Q
X
UJ
O
z
<
O
O
UJ
<
>
z
UJ
CO
O
O
O
H
s
<
-J
D
X
ui
<
<
u
_J
ft.
Z
-5
P
D
D
D
D
D
?
u>
D
D
?
D
D
?
C
'?
?
D
D
D
?
?
?
D
?
D
D
?
?
?
?
?
?
D
?
?
D
?
?
D
D
D
D
D
D
<
P
.
-J)
o
c
<
i)
<
0>
H
0
UJ
Z
<
H
<
>
co
y
>
<
UJ
j
UJ
>
Z
l-H
H
<-
CO
CO
<
O
X
ft.
Ul
UJ
UJ
-J
<
0-
05
Q
X