Wheildon, C 1990, 'Communicating or just making pretty shapes', 3rd end, Newspaper Bureau of Australia Ltd, North Sydney, excerpts pp. 11-15
This reading discusses a concept called redaing gravity in relation to the Gutenberg diagram. Here are my notes on this presentation.
The main concepts covered in this summary include Edmund Arnold’s Gutenberg Diagram which involves the concept of reading gravity and the importance of good design to communicate effectively. I will also discuss these questions:
· Do all languages follow the same reading gravity?
· Do we read images and visuals differently to written words?
· How do we read pictures and words on a computer screen, such as internet WebPages?
So, what is Edmund Arnold’s Gutenberg Diagram? It describes the natural reading pattern that we follow when reading text. Firstly our eyes enter the page at the upper left corner, known as the Primary Optical Area. Then, after finishing the first line of text, our eyes naturally fall to the beginning of the next line, the point directly under the beginning of the first line. This is called the axis of orientation. The eye then continues to scan the page, moving left to right until it reaches the bottom left hand corner. In some texts, such as magazine articles, there is a signal in the form of a logo, symbol or bolded piece of writing which lets the reader know they have completed the text. This is known as the terminal anchor. The reading also suggests that in some texts the author will use illustrations or images to direct the reader’s attention to the corners of the page.
This reading process, which the Gutenberg diagram explains, is called reading gravity and is a very important element to understand when designing texts.
So now that you understand what reading gravity is based on the Gutenberg diagram it is time to find out why it is an important principle when designing texts. This reading covers a series of tests undertaken to find out whether reading gravity is important. Wheildon presented groups of people with 2 texts; one which followed the principles of reading gravity outlined in the Gutenberg diagram and one which did not. He found that the readers of Figure 6 had much higher comprehension rates than those of Figure 7. When reading Figure 6, our eyes enter the page at the Primary Optical Area, the top left corner. We then read the first line and our eyes drop to the second line to the Axis of Orientation. Our eyes scan each line of each column from left to right, each time returning to the same axis of orientation, and finally we reach the terminal anchor which tells us the text is finished. In Figure 7 however, our eyes enter the page at the Primary Optical Area before we realise this is not the beginning of the text. We then have to search for the beginning, the heading, and after having read it, our eyes fall naturally to the point directly below to where we would expect the axis of orientation to be. However this point is not the beginning of the main body of text so once again we have to search for the start of the article. The author has tried to make this search easier by using a drop cap, a larger letter at the beginning of the paragraph which catches our attention. Having found this we can begin to read the article.
As you can probably tell just from my explanation, reading Figure 7 seems much more complicated and confusing than the relatively easy reading layout of Figure 6. And this is just what Wheildon found in his tests. Readers of Figure 7 not only had much lower comprehension levels and some also found the task exhausting and confusing. As Wheildon says...
“[when] reading rhythm has been destroyed, as the research programme shows, considerable damage may have been done to the reader’s comprehension of the article...”
Wheildon, 1990, p. 11
“...many of the readers who made the journey against reading gravity found the task exhausting in some way, and some read only two or three paragraphs before losing interest.”
Wheildon, 1990, p.14
Wheildon, 1990, p.14
Wheildon also conducted another test with very similar results, reaching the conclusion that layouts which follow the natural reading rhythm of reading gravity are best. At the end of the reading, he also highlights other examples of ineffective layouts which you can have a look at on pages 14 and 15 of the reading.
Reading gravity is obviously an important aspect to keep in mind when considering the layout of a text in English, but is it the same in every language? I propose that languages such as Arabic or Hebrew, where words are written and read from right to left would not follow the exact same reading gravity. I did search for information to support this but it seems that very little research, at least research that was available to me, has not been conducted on the subject.
The next question I wanted to raise was, do we read images and visuals differently to written words? According to the author of reading 3, Walsh, and to Kress and van Leeuwen, we do not follow the same principle of reading gravity. The image is there at once and fills the page, so our eyes are attracted not so much to certain points on the page but more to what is known as the ‘visual grammar’ of the image, aspects such as colour, framing, line, angle and perspective.
Due to the internet and computers becoming a huge part of our daily lives in the last few years, I thought I’d also comment on how we read words and images on a computer screen. There is a slightly different reading path than texts on paper and it is known, as our tutor has told us, as the F Pattern. Firstly our eyes start at the top left corner and read down the left bar. We then read from left to right similarly to when we read texts on paper. As you can see from the example I have here which is the course homepage for this subject.
So in conclusion, I think the most important design principle to take from this reading is to design a text in the most appropriate and effective way for the audience to gain the most from it. And that means being aware of concepts such as reading gravity. As Wheildon says “Good design is a balance between function and form, and the greater of these is function”. This means that a design must be visually appealing but most importantly, it must effectively convey meaning.
“The conclusion to be drawn must be that designs which conform to natural reading physiology are largely acceptable to readers; those that don’t conform run the risk of going largely unread.”
Wheildon, 1990, p. 14
Wheildon, 1990, p. 14
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think the presentation was a success and I thoroughly enjoyed researching this topic. If you's like to take a look at some of the other presentations presented, here are the URL's for their blogs.
http://madamemedia.blogspot.com/ for a look at the complex ideas surrounding medical narratives
http://themotherofallmedia.blogspot.com/ for information on deisgning for print, with particular reference to brochure design
http://pretzeljetaime.blogspot.com/ for information on designing documents for internet usage
http://randomclicks-horatio.blogspot.com/ gives you an insight into how prose and graphics interact along with the five ways in which they can be combined
No comments:
Post a Comment