Writer perception of reader preference

Author(s):  
G. McClure
Keyword(s):  

2009 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 487-511 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gina N. Cervetti ◽  
Marco A. Bravo ◽  
Elfrieda H. Hiebert ◽  
P. David Pearson ◽  
Carolyn A. Jaynes


1997 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 319-361 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Dressman

This study examines the construct of reader preference along the lines of gender and social class. Data were collected through focused interviews and participant observation from one third-grade class in each of three elementary school libraries that served children from a range of ethnic and social class backgrounds. The study argues that children's expressions of preference are often enactments of what they believe it means to be categorically male or female, whereas their ways of relating to different genres of text, as well as how they choose to read, often enact the “habitus,” or material logic, of their social class. This analysis is complicated by three events in which the doing of gender or class by students is interrupted by stronger desires. The article concludes with a reconsideration of preference as a construct, and questions why educators might want to know what children like to read in the first place.



1990 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. 737-745 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodney S. Owen ◽  
Felix W. Wehrli
Keyword(s):  


2013 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 16-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sofie Beier ◽  
Kevin Larson

Some typographers have proposed that typeface familiarity is defined by the amount of time that a reader has been exposed to a typeface design, while other typographers have proposed that familiarity is defined by the commonalities in letter shapes. These two hypotheses were tested by measuring the reading speed and preferences of participants. Participants were tested twice with common and uncommon letter shapes, once before and once after spending 20 minutes reading a story with the font. The results indicate that the exposure period has an effect on the speed of reading, but the uncommon letter shapes did not. Readers did not like the uncommon letter shapes. This has implications for the selection of type and the design of future typefaces.



2008 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 238-247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles F. Hofacker ◽  
Mark R. Gleim ◽  
Stephanie J. Lawson
Keyword(s):  


Author(s):  
Theodore T. Miller ◽  
Gabrielle P. Konin ◽  
Joseph T. Nguyen ◽  
Shefali Kothary ◽  
Ogonna K. Nwawka ◽  
...  


1994 ◽  
Vol 15 (1-4) ◽  
pp. 81-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. G. Kulkarni ◽  
Lindsey C. Puryear
Keyword(s):  


1995 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 2-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Mueller ◽  
David Kamerer

Although subjects in this experiment could navigate through an electronic newspaper, it was not a satisfactory substitute for a printed newspaper.



1979 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 66-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.B. Cooper ◽  
H.N. Daglish ◽  
J.A. Adams
Keyword(s):  


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document