Article published In:
Information Design JournalVol. 2:3/4 (1981) ► pp.251–255
Readability indices
Do they inform or misinform?
This paper discusses recent criticism of readability formulas, in this issue of IDJ and elsewhere; the author points to evidence in their favor and focuses on three aspects of their application: when, how and why. He distinguishes between the valid use of formulas to predict reading difficulty and the invalid use to produce clear writing. Finally he points to recent research which explores new and more subtle variables.
Cited by
Cited by 6 other publications
DUFFY, THOMAS M.
1985. Readability Formulas: What's the Use?*. In Designing Usable Texts, ► pp. 113 ff. 
Holanda Banhos, Alberto Sérgio & Sonia Rosa Arbues Decoster
2023. Transparência e Legibilidade dos Demonstrativos Contábeis do Governo do Estado do Ceará em tempos de Pandemia da Covid-19. Revista Catarinense da Ciência Contábil 22 ► pp. e3412 ff.
Howes, Loene M., Roberta Julian, Sally F. Kelty, Nenagh Kemp & K. Paul Kirkbride
2014. The readability of expert reports for non-scientist report-users: Reports of DNA analysis. Forensic Science International 237 ► pp. 7 ff.
Howes, Loene Monique
2015. A step towards increased understanding by non-scientists of expert reports: recommendations for readability. Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences 47:4 ► pp. 456 ff.
SCHUMACHER, GARY M. & ROBERT WALLER
1985. Testing Design Alternatives: A Comparison of Procedures. In Designing Usable Texts, ► pp. 377 ff.
Wright, Patricia
1987. Chapter 8: Writing Technical Information. Review of Research in Education 14:1 ► pp. 327 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 31 march 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.