The subconscious effect of typography | Samantha Byrd | TEDxYouth@NIS

Samantha Byrd graduated from Texas State University with two degrees in Communication Design and Advertising. After working in the graphic design and advertising world, Samantha is unable to unsee design everywhere she goes. For better or worse, it's always on the forefront of her mind as she walks through any supermarket, drives down the highway or even rummages through her cabinet. But what about those with an untrained eye? Her talk will explore how typography and font choice manipulates people's subconscious perception.

This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at https://www.ted.com/tedx

We encounter messaging constantly:

on billboards,

our phones,

the labels of products we use every day.

J. Walker Smith,

president of marketing firm Yankelovich,

stated that we are exposed to as many
as 5,000 advertisements a day.

Our minds are constantly
being saturated by messaging.

But to what level
is our perception of these brands

being dictated
by the advertising industry?

Is our preference
for one brand over another

based on its quality,

our awareness of the brand,

the way it's presented
at the point of purchase?

When a product's catchy jingle
gets stuck in our head,

we might be more inclined
to choose that product over another.

That's a more obvious advertising tactic.

But is there a subtler persuasion at play?

Can designers use typography
to manipulate us on a subconscious level?

Think back.

How many times have you
bought a bottle of wine

based on its fancy-looking label,

later to only be basically
pouring purple vinegar?

Me too.

So first, let's do a quick
crash course on typography,

so we can all become experts.

Typography is the general term
for the style and appearance of text.

A typeface is a stylized collection
of letters and numbers.

The whole collection is called a family.

Much like your own family,

they're similar,
but they have their own style.

See, you have the fun uncle,

you have the cousin going through
his heavy-metal phase,

you have the aunt that insists
you have a second plate.

Typeface and font
are often used interchangeably.

However, nowadays,
a font only refers to the digital file.

The two most common ways
to group typefaces

are serif and sans serif.

Serif means the typeface
has little feet at the bottom

whereas sans serif does not.

But, of course, there are many
other subcategories.

Different type designs
convey different emotions.

For instance,

something in bold
might feel heavy and impactful,

something in script might feel elegant,

and something in a geometric sans serif
might feel more modern.

The emotion a typeface evokes

can be considered a subjective gray area.

However, I can assure you

the majority of people would not say
Comic Sans gives off a "scholarly" vibe.

About seven years ago,

scientists at the European Organization
for Nuclear Research

announced they'd discovered
something called the "God Particle."

Some refer to this

as one of the most important
scientific breakthroughs in decades.

But they presented their information

in arguably the most hated
typeface on earth.

That week, trending on Twitter
higher than the God Particle

was Comic Sans.

One simple design choice

completely shifted the conversation

from this incredible
scientific breakthrough

to how ridiculous a typeface designed
for Windows 95 children's software is.

So we've seen that typefaces
can distract us from the message.

But can simply the style of letters
sway us to believe what we're reading?

Errol Morris, who's known
for his investigative documentaries,

was inspired by this

and conducted an experiment
in 2012 just to test this.

He found inspiration from reading
designer Phil Renaud's blog.

Renaud wrote about how in university

his grades had drastically improved

despite not adding any additional effort.

After a bit of detective work,

he had realized
only one thing had changed:

his choice of typeface.

After reviewing 52 essays,

he realized that essays written
in sans serif Trebuchet MS

had averaged a B-minus,

whereas those written in serif fonts
Georgia and Times New Roman

averaged A and A-minus.

Now, Morris was definitely
inspired by this,

but he wanted a more empirical test.

He wrote a New York Times article
featuring excerpts.

At the end of the article,

readers were asked two questions:

"Is the information in the excerpt true?"

and "How confident are you
in your conclusion?"

The twist was readers
were being presented the information

in a different typeface each time.

Not surprisingly,

the excerpts written in Comic Sans
were not very well received.

However,

two seemingly similar serif typefaces

had drastically different results.

Baskerville had the lowest rate
of disagreement,

whereas Georgia had the highest.

IBM designers Alessio Laiso
and Rick Sobiesiak

wanted to see

if the superiority of Baskerville
held true outside of news articles.

Participants in their test
were given four sites -

a banking,

fitness,

shopping,

a news site -

all in four different typefaces.

They were then asked to rate them

on a scale of trustworthiness,

how appealing they were,

and how easy they were to use.

Overall, Baskerville held its title
as the most trustworthy.

But if we look closer,

we see that the fitness site
opposed the news site,

naming Baskerville
as the least trustworthy

and Fira as the most.

So perhaps typefaces can influence
our sense of credibility.

But can they go further
and affect our senses?

Researchers Vincent P. Magnini
and Seontaik Kim

published research in the International
Journal of Hospitality Management

indicating that italicized menus

caused potential diners
to see a restaurant as more upscale,

with the capability
of delivering top-rate service.

Is it possible that this design choice

sets up customers to enjoy this meal

more than one ordered off of another menu?

That this design choice will set up
a preconceived notion of quality

before they even taste the food?

So before I began my talk,

I gave you a slip of paper.

This slip of paper had a spray of perfume

as well as the logo
of that perfume printed on it.

I then asked you to estimate

what a 50-milliliter bottle
of this perfume might cost

and rate its quality
on a scale of 1 to 100

via a live online poll.

So these are the results.

The more cheesy-looking sans serif logo

had an even spread of votes
among the lower brackets of price scales,

whereas if we look over here,

the large majority for the script logo

rested in the 150 to 300 RMB,
or 22 dollar to 45 dollar, price points.

Additionally, we can see
a difference in the rate of quality.

Those that were given
the cheesy-looking logo

had a quality estimate median of 48.9%,

but those that were given the script

sat at 57.1% -

nearly a 10% difference
in quality estimation.

These two fictitious brands
have the same name.

In fact, all strips of paper

were sprayed with the same 2 dollar,
15 RMB, bottle of perfume.

The only difference
is the typeface of the logo.

How can we be more cognizant
of this persuasive messaging?

Is there a way that we can see past
the implications these typefaces give us

to judge in a more objective way?

Before you make your next purchase,

ask yourself:

are you buying the product
or the packaging?

Thank you.

(Applause)