DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Legibility Evaluation of Two and Three Syllable Words Used in Pesticides According to Font, Thickness, Gender, and Visual Acuity

시력, 폰트, 굵기, 성별에 따른 2음절 및 3음절 농약 제품 표시글자의 가독성 평가

  • 황해영 (경운대학교 안경광학과) ;
  • 송영웅 (대구가톨릭대학교 산업보건학과)
  • Received : 2012.06.25
  • Accepted : 2012.08.09
  • Published : 2012.08.31

Abstract

Safety and health related information for the proper use and handing of pesticides is usually printed on the surface of the pesticide products in the form of texts. But, the guidelines or standards for the appropriate presentation of the texts for the pesticide products are most vague or not practical. Thus, this study aimed to provide the preliminary guidelines for the text sizes based on the legibility experiments. To achieve the objective legibility evaluation experiments were conducted to test the effects of different near vision (0.6, ${\geq}0.8$), gender, font type(thick gothic-type and fine gothic-type), thickness of font(plain and bold), and number of syllables(2 and 3 syllables) in the same age group of 20s. The results showed that legibility was different according to the visual acuity (p<0.05), and no other main effects showed statistically significant effects. The 'maximum illegible size' to read at least one word correctly in all the text conditions was 2 pt when the near vision was ${\geq}0.8$, and 2 pt or 3 pt when the near vision was 0.6. The 'minimum legible size' for 100% correct answer was 9 pt for the near vision of 0.6, and 5.3 pt for ${\geq}0.8$, respectively. Mean character size does not read any discomfort in 0.6 was 15.5 pt in both male and female but male was mean 8.5 pt, female was 10 pt in ${\geq}0.8$. Considering these experimental results, it was recommended that the 16 pt or larger characters should be used the important information such as 'Pesticides' or toxicity, and the minimum character size was 9 pt for the less important information.

농약의 안전보건 정보 표시는 보통 농약병의 표면에 인쇄되어 있다. 그러나 농약의 적절한 표시를 위한 가이드라인이나 기준은 대부분 애매하거나 실용적이지 못하다. 본 연구의 목적은 시력에 따른 가독성 실험을 통하여 적절한 글자 크기의 가이드라인을 설정하는 것이다. 실험은 20대의 20명을 대상으로 근거리시력(0.6, ${\geq}0.8$), 성별, 글자체(세고딕, 중고딕), 글자의 굵기(plain, bold), 음절수(2음절, 3음절)가 농약 표시 글자의 가독성에 미치는 영향을 평가하였다. 가독성 평가를 위한 종속변수로는 정답률이 0%가 되는 최대글자크기, 정답률 100%가 되는 최소 글자크기, 주관적 불편도를 사용하였다. 실험 결과 가독성은 근거리 시력에 의해서만 유의한 차이를 나타냈다. 정답률이 0%가 되는 최대 글자크기는 근거리 시력 ${\geq}0.8$에서는 2pt, 0.6에서는 2~3pt로 나타났다. 정답률 100%의 최소가독 글자크기는 근거리 시력 0.6에서는 9pt, ${\geq}0.8$에서는 5.3pt로 나타났다. 근거리 시력 0.6과 ${\geq}0.8$의 시력에 따른 글자 크기별 불편도는 0.6에서는 남,녀 모두 평균 15.5 pt에서 불편도 1(읽는데 전혀 불편함이 없음)에 도달하였으나 ${\geq}0.8$에서는 남자의 경우 평균 8.5 pt, 여자는 평균 10 pt에서 불편도 1에 도달하였다. 농약 표시 글자 크기에 대한 가이드라인은 중요성이 떨어지는 정보의 경우는 9 pt 이상, '농약' 표시나 독성 표시와 같은 안전상 중요한 내용의 경우는 16 pt 이상이 적절한 것으로 생각된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Y. W. Song, C. W. Lim, I. S. Lee, M. C. Jung, S .M. Mo, Y. K. Kong, "Effects of the Syllable Number, Font Type, Color Contrast, Display Type, Letter Size and Age Group on the Legibility of the Korean Characters", Journal of the KOSOS, Vol.24, No.5, pp.92-100, 2009.
  2. J. C. Chung., "A study on the Readability of Hangul expressed on monitor", master thesis, Hansung University (1997).
  3. W. S. Hwang, D. C. Lee, S. D. Lee, J. H. Lee, "Visual Performance on VDT Different Korean Letter Size and Font", Journal of the Ergonomics Society of Korea, Vol.16, No.2, pp.29-38, 1997.
  4. S. J. Park, J. S. Lee, D. H. Kang, H. J. Lee, "Legibility evaluation for the letter size of an electronic product", Ergonomics Society of Korea conference, pp.360-369, 2007.
  5. S. J. Lee, J. W. Kim, "An Experimental Study on the Impacts of Luminance Contrast Upon Readability in VDT Environments", Journal of the Ergonomics Society of Korea, Vol.26, No.2 pp.21-33, 2007. https://doi.org/10.5143/JESK.2007.26.2.021
  6. T. S. Tullis, J. L. Boynton, H. Hersh, "Readability of fonts in the windows environment", Conference Companion on Human Factors in Computing System, pp.127-123, 1995.
  7. A. I. Rudnicky, P. A. Kolers, "Size and case of type as stimuli in reading", Journal of Experimental Psychology in Human Perception and Performance, Vol.10, pp.231-249, 1984. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.10.2.231
  8. M. L. Bernard, B. S. Chaparro, M. M. Mills, Halcomb, "Examining children's reading performance and preference for different computer-displayed text", Behavior and Information Technology, Vol.21, No.2, pp.87-96, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290210146737
  9. I. Darroch, J. Goodman, S. Brewster, P. Gray, "The effect of age and font size on reading text on handheld computers", Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol.3585, pp.253-266, 2005.
  10. US Department of Health and Human Services, Guidance for Industry: Labelling OTC Human Drug Products Questions and Answers, FDA, 2005.
  11. Japanese Industrial Standard, Guidelines for the elderly and people with disabilities-Visual signs and displays- Estimation of minimum legible size for a Japanese single character, 2003.
  12. European Commission, Guideline on the readability of the labelling and package leaflet of medicinal products for human use, 2009.
  13. Song, Y. W., Lim, C. W., Choi, S. J., "Guidelines and Sample Investigation about the Texts and Icons used to deliver the Safety and Health Information in Pesticides", Journal of Korea Safety Management & Science, 12(3), 2010.
  14. C. W. Lim, K. C. Lim, H. Y. Hwang, S. J. Choi, Y. W. Song, "A Questionnaire Survey about the Degree of Understanding of the Safety and Health Information by Agricultural Workers", Journal of Korea Safety Management & Science, Vol.12, pp.27-33, 2010.
  15. Statistics Korea, "2009 Survey Report of Agriculture", 2010.
  16. W. J. Benjamin, "Borish's Clinical Refraction", 1st Ed. Saunders, pp.697, 1998.
  17. Theodore Grosvenor FAAO. "Primary Care Optometry", 4th Ed. Butterworth-Heinemann, pp.469-480, 2001.
  18. C. W. Lim, H. Y. Hwang, Y. W. Song, "Legibility evaluation of the safety and health information used in pesticides", Journal of Korea Safety Management & Science, Vol.13, No.3, pp.29-35, 2011.
  19. H. Akutsu, G. E. Legge, J. A. Ross, K. J. Schuebel, "Psychophysics of reading :X. Effects of age-related changes on vision", Journal of Psychological Science, Vol.46 No.6, pp.325-331, 1991.
  20. M. Mackeben, "Typefaces influence peripheral letter recognition and can be optimized for reading with eccentric viewing", Paper presented at the Vision 99, New York, NY, 1999.
  21. J. S. Mansfield, G. E. Legge, M. C. Bane, "Psychophysics of reading Xv: Fonteffects in normal and low vision", Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Vol.37, No.8, pp.1492-1501, 1996.
  22. S. Whittaker, F. Rohrkaste, K. E. Higgins, "Optimum letter spacing for word recognition in central and eccentric fields, Noninvasive assessment of the visual system". Technical digest series, 7, Washington, DC: Optical Society of America, 1989.
  23. I. H. Shen, K. K. Shieh, C. Y. Chao, D. S. Lee, "Lighting, font style, and polarity on visual performance and visual fatigue with electronic paper displays", Displays, Vol.30, 2009.
  24. N. C. Silver, C. C. Braun, "Perceived readability of warning labels with varied font sizes and styles", Safety Science, Vol.16, pp.615-625, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1016/0925-7535(93)90026-A