I found this https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/48753/does-the-use-of...
- > In Universal Principles of Design, the entry on legibility states: Proportionally spaced typefaces are preferred over monospaced.
- It's unclear if that book provides further evidence to this statement
- > One famous research on this is Beldie I. P., Pastoor S. & Schwarz E, 1983, “Fixed versus variable letter width for televised text”, Human Factors, 25, pp.273-277, where part of the results include: The reading time (Task 1) with the variable-matrix character design was 69.1 s on the average, and the mean reading time with the fixed-matrix character set was 73.3 s, t (8) = 2.76, p < 0.02. The difference is 4.2 s or 6.1% (related to fixed-matrix characters).
- I couldn't find a pdf of that one in particular. The difference seems small
- https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0144929021014673...
- > Comic Sans MS, Arial and Times New Roman typefaces, regardless of size, were found to be more readable (as measured by a reading efficiency score) than Courier New.
- small sample size 27 children. also the children preferred comic sans... we could pick a cooler monospace font than courier new
- https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10209-015-0438-8
- > It was found that larger text and larger character spacings lead the participants with and without dyslexia to read significantly faster
- unclear if those were monospaced
- https://www.researchgate.net/publication/20925173_Reading_wi...
> We compared the effects of fixed and variable (proportional) spacing on reading speeds and found variable pitch to yield better performance at medium and large character sizes and fixed pitch to be superior for character sizes approaching the acuity limit.
