Sans Forgetica font does not improve Cognitive Reflection Test performance despite differences in legibility

Abstract

Many studies have failed to replicate the disfluency effect (i.e. disfluent font better than fluent font) on Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) performance shown in Alter et al. (2007). Those studies manipulated perceptual disfluency using color, style, size, and/or typefaces. The new Sans Forgetica (SF) typeface, designed to promote desirable difficulty, creates perceptual disfluency through fragmented letters, which make it difficult for readers to use good continuation and perceptual completion to identify letters. Here, we compare CRT performance and font legibility ratings when CRT problems are presented in SF or in Arial. After solving CRT problems, participants who solved the problems in SF rated Arial to be harder to read than participants who solved the problems in Arial, suggesting that after prolong use of SF, participants viewed Arial as being closer in legibility to SF.

Cite this work

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

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 3 citations exist upstream.

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