[hrafn]

These kinds of fonts do not help dyslexics at all. Children in fact show a preference for reading in Arial and Times New Roman. Some research has shown that increased letter spacing results in fewer errors, but studies are not unanimous about this.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5934461

[doctor_eval]

Really?

We experimented with heaps of different fonts, colours, sizes, and OpenDyslexic is the one thing that worked the dyslexic in our family. It has significantly changed our lives for the better.

You’re doing people a huge disservice by dismissing it out of hand or sprouting some bullshit about children’s preferences. It costs literally nothing to try out - you just have to visit the web page ffs - and it either works or it doesn’t, but if it works it can be life changing.

[conistonwater]

Here is the abstract for the linked study:

> In two experiments, the claim was tested that the font “Dyslexie”, specifically designed for people with dyslexia, eases reading performance of children with (and without) dyslexia. Three questions were investigated. (1) Does the Dyslexie font lead to faster and/or more accurate reading? (2) Do children have a preference for the Dyslexie font? And, (3) is font preference related to reading performance? In Experiment 1, children with dyslexia (n = 170) did not read text written in Dyslexie font faster or more accurately than in Arial font. The majority preferred reading in Arial and preference was not related to reading performance. In Experiment 2, children with (n = 102) and without dyslexia (n = 45) read word lists in three different font types (Dyslexie, Arial, Times New Roman). Words written in Dyslexie font were not read faster or more accurately. Moreover, participants showed a preference for the fonts Arial and Times New Roman rather than Dyslexie, and again, preference was not related to reading performance. These experiments clearly justify the conclusion that the Dyslexie font neither benefits nor impedes the reading process of children with and without dyslexia.

It is not some bullshit about children's preferences, it's a pretty reasonable way to evaluate a font in a more objective setting.

[salmo]

It's one study that says that one font (not the same one) didn't appreciably help a handful of kids with and without dyslexia. It's interesting, but not enough to make any kind of generalization. Heck, without being independently reproduced, it's not enough to make its own claims.

The study used word lists vs. prose. I'm no expert, but that limits a reader's abilities for pattern recognition. Also, the age and reading experience of the reader may have bearing on the potential benefits. This just looked at children (otherwise unspecified).

To me, the interesting finding there is that preference does not correlate to speed or accuracy for the given task. It might be that even kids just pick the one they think is prettier and that even with kids most folks "like" clean-lined sans-serif.

I know design folks say that sans-serif are good for signs, titles, etc. (which would apply to bear words) and serif are better for prose. I have no idea if there's good data to back that up, though.

[klint]

Here are a couple of round-ups of studies:

https://bigelowandholmes.typepad.com/bigelow-holmes/2014/11/...

https://www.truthorfiction.com/dyslexie-font/

This study looked at OpenDyslexic, and found subjects preferred Verdana and Arial:

http://dyslexiahelp.umich.edu/sites/default/files/good_fonts...

Whether sans serif or serif fonts are more legible remains contested:

http://alexpoole.info/blog/which-are-more-legible-serif-or-s...

[doctor_eval]

I didn’t read the whole study but it certainly seemed flawed to me.

- dyslexia is a condition, not a disease. The underlying problem is not well understood and there are probably multiple causes. The study groups all children together as if they are identical.

- the font is successful if any child benefits from it, not if a majority or average benefit. This kind of flaw seems prevalent in many studies. If it makes reading faster for some children then it’s a benefit. It doesn’t matter if it doesn’t work for everyone.

- it doesn’t look like these tests were reading-out-loud tests, which is specifically where we have seen the most improvement. In my experience OpenDyslexic improved reading out loud which lead to improved silent reading and significantly improved comprehension over a period of weeks. The important thing here is that dyslexic children use coping mechanisms such as skimming to give the appearance of being able to read like their peers (at least this was this case for us).

Given my own personal experience in which OpenDyslexic (not Dyslexie) has been life changing for my family, the study appears to be bullshit. While I haven’t examined the study in detail, it is not clear that the findings justify the very strong claims that it makes.

[skrebbel]

I really don't get this vibe. It's not like this is some potentially-harmful fake medicine, or an expensive scam.

From the very top of the page:

> If you like the way you are able to read this page, and others, then this typeface is for you!

Even if that's a "yes" for only 2% of dyslexics, then isn't that good enough? Why can't a reader decide for themselves whether they find that page easier to read than most?

[powersnail]

> Even if that's a "yes" for only 2% of dyslexics, then isn't that good enough? Why can't a reader decide for themselves whether they find that page easier to read than most?

If a drug cures 2% cases of cancer patients, with absolutely no downside, it wouldn't be a cure for cancer. It would be incredible, but still it cannot be claimed to be a cure for cancer.

The name and branding all suggest the font to counter dyslexia generally. That would be ridiculously misguiding if it only helps tiny fraction of dyslexia. Is it a helpful invention? But it's far from what the branding promises.

Of course readers can decide for themselves whether it works for them or not; but a misleading branding is still misleading.

[prox]

I don’t see this website claiming anything bold or misleading, the intro paragraph is very modest, and there is a HN commenter who already feels its helpful. And you don’t go around naming your domain opendyslexiafontbutforonlysomedyslexics.org

I don’t see the misleading part tbh.

[doctor_eval]

No, but if there was a free and completely harmless drug that cured cancer in 2% of cases then you’d definitely give it a shot if you had cancer.

I mean the website itself is written in its own font, it’s gonna be pretty clear to a dyslexic if it’s gonna help or not.

[elmo2you]

I have dyslexia (or slysdexia), and I do get this negative "vibe". If fact, I get it very well.

Over the years I've seen my share of these "fonts for dyslectic people". I often looked at them with high hopes, only to feel disappointed by how not a single one had any significant effect on me. Sure, most of them looked clean and tidy (but so do many other fonts), and there sure are other fonts that make things a hell of a lot worse (although maybe not as much is some might think).

Time and again, I find the claims associated with these fonts just falling short (if not totally bogus). Actually, from my personal experience I find this the whole concept, that a font will significantly impact or solve this problem, rather preposterous and maybe even insulting. Even to a level that it sounds mostly like irritating marketing snake oil, at least to me. I'm not saying that these fonts have not been made with only the best of intentions. Maybe they all are. But their presentation certainly ruins that for me.

From my own experiences, I simply can't agree with what all of these fonts claim to do (at least not more than what many other, more commonly used, fonts already do). But the assumption that this problem can be fixed with a font, annoys me most of all.

Even if it does help some people, it may also do a huge disservice to everyone for which it does nothing, while claiming or implying how it should improve their situation too.

After many years of receiving my own share of: "why don't you just read properly", please consider me edgy and easily triggered on the subject.

#end-of-rant

[doctor_eval]

I’m sorry for your experience but dyslexia is not a singular condition and not everyone responds to the same stimuli.

OpenDyslexia has been a godsend for our family. I’m sorry it doesn’t work for you. I also know someone who found that coloured lenses helped her, but it made no difference to us.

Like most things in life, YMMV.

[elmo2you]

Please, don't get me wrong. I'm not sure if you did, but it appears that you might have.

I do not really have any personal issue with my condition. Everyone who needs to know does, and it's never a show-stopper for anything essential in my life.

I do sincerely thank you for your sympathy/empathy, but it's not something I actually need. I've learned to live with and around dyslexia a long time ago, rather similar to how somebody with a physical handicap since birth no doubt would.

I honestly would not be surprised if it's a complex condition indeed. I would be even less surprised if different conditions ended up being classified under the same moniker, just because they share superficial symptoms (for this is how our healthcare systems function, especially for most mind related topics). I'm not having any issue with that either.

However, what pisses me off, is when people claim to have a solution that just isn't. I don't think it's just me. I know (quite) a few more people with dyslexia, but I don't recall any of them ever having any significant benefit from any of these "special" fonts (beyond comparing them to fonts that probably would confuse most "ordinary" people too).

I would honestly like to hear from other people with dyslexia, if there is even a single one among them that had a real significant benefit from any of these fonts. Because so far, I have never met one.

I again would like to stress that these efforts may nonetheless be pursued with nothing but good intentions. Still, as the saying goes ... the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Only to illustrate the principle, but certainly not to imply that the effects are even remote comparable: the colonial missionaries who came to "spread religion and culture" to the "savages in the new worlds", did often have sincere intentions (yet extremely misguided and wrong on so many levels, as most sane people today will instantly agree with). Even though the example is extreme, I hope it helps to understand why I have an issue with "doing good" for the wrong reasons in general. It has a remarkable habit of ending up more harmful than good.

[doctor_eval]

Sorry, I made a few comments on this thread and naturally you wouldn’t have seen all of them.

One of my family members has dyslexia and this font changed their life.

[xondono]

The problem is that most people aren't dyslexic.

My first impresion of this is that it might be a good idea to add a button to my blog changing the fonts with this one for accessibility.

Aside from the obvious cost to me (and limited benefit to others), implementing this might make me more resistant to doing something else that actually helps.

[1f60c]

A problem arises when a people think using this font will solve all accessibility problems, without consulting with people with dyslexia.

[kerkeslager]

Well, there are 55 donors on Patreon donating $332/mo. That's not nothing. The deception doesn't have to be intentional to be harmful.

[doctor_eval]

I am really struggling with this attitude. Why in gods name would people donate if it didn’t help them?

It’s reading. You know if it helps you or not because suddenly the words stop swimming around.

[kerkeslager]

> Why in gods name would people donate if it didn’t help them?

Because they think it helps other people?

[dathinab]

$332/mo of "can disappear at any time" donations aren't much at all.

There are WAY easier ways to do scams earning much more with much less effort.

Plus even if it does not reliably help dyslexic people, if it helps or is liked by the people who donate it's not a scam at all, even if the since behind it turns out to be incorrect.

[dathinab]

I'm minimal dyslexic, this font doesn't make me read faster, actually it makes me read slower.

But it helps me to read more correct.

I plan to use it for proof reading for the next larger text I will soon have to write.

As I haven't used it much it's just a guess, but I estimate it will majorly help me with proof reading texts I had written.

[gnicholas]

The research on OD and Dyslexie is mixed, but I added it to my Chrome extension, which is designed to improve readability. [1] Before we added it, it was probably our most-requested feature.

1: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/beeline-reader/ifj...