Readability formulas have even more limitations than Klare discusses

Janice C. Redish

159 citations0/0 files storedACM Journal of Computer Documentation

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Text Readability and Simplification Usability and User Interface Design Health Literacy and Information Accessibility

Abstract

A literature review reveals many technical weaknesses of readability formulas (when compared to direct usability testing with typical readers): they were developed for children s school books, not adult technical documentation;they ignore between-reader differences and the effects of content, layout, and retrieval aids on text usefulness; they emphasize countable features at the expense of more subtle contributors to text comprehension.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 159 citations exist upstream.

References

2000The measurement of readability 1998Dynamics in Document Design 1979Making Legal Language Understandable: A Psycholinguistic Study of Jury Instructions 1996Dynamics in Document Design: Creating Text for Readers 1976A Second Look at the Validityl of Readability Formulas

Cited by

2004The Principles of Readability.

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.