Visual design decisions may persuade at unquestioned and unconscious levels, and they may be indelibly imbued with their historical identity.

Well known to advertisers, these stylistic typographic choices transmit a powerful message to viewers and influence their impressions of the product (Coleman and Wasike 2003: 1). This research quantitatively investigates the connotative value of a set of four typefaces in the context of the Competence–Credibility–Charisma–Compassion Scale-or C4 Scale (Buck & Viera, 2001) as a method to understand the impact typefaces can have in presidential campaigns.įacets of graphic design, logo design, typefaces, and other images absorbed through rapid cognition have a psychological effect on the viewer. Visual dissonance (Soslo, 1996) an adaption of cognitive dissonance, is the mental stress produced by such contradiction, it is a factor known to hinder the possibilities of influencing attitudes and compliance gaining (Gass & Seiter, 2013). Given the potential influence that typefaces can exert on people’s attitudes, visual communications designers must understand the impact the messages they craft may have on their audiences, and avoid possible contradictions between how the message is presented and what was expected of the message. The implication of this finding is that emotional responses to visual stimuli are already triggered by the time we get to think through them, thus influencing conscious attitudes and behavior. Research has demonstrated that images travel first from the eye to the thalamus and the amygdala, before a second signal is sent to the neocortex (Seward, 1997). Harrison and Morris (1967) suggested that typefaces can connotatively reinforce the textual content of a message, provide new and independent meaning for words, offer neutral or minimal connotation, or create a conflict between the connotation and denotation of the words. The fact that typefaces can non-verbally communicate is an intriguing fact due to the relevance of its textual signification and high usage in daily routine. The same way clothing can suggest fragments of the persona of who wears them, it has been suggested that typefaces carry connotative value. Since the invention of movable type, letters and characters of the Western alphabet have worn many different typefaces. Because people reported the same emotion response to the same design features, this study suggests that design's underlying features represent a common visual language. The design examples consisted of six similar typefaces with visible differences in form.

Those feelings, in turn, varied according to the formative design features of the typeface. Forty-two participants answered a questionnaire to discover 'Are certain emotions predominantly associated with the formative design features of typefaces-differences in classification (serif or sans serif), terminal construction (angular or rounded), character width (condensed or extended), and weight (light or bold)?' Even though people have individual aesthetic preferences, statistical analysis found that many participants reported comparable emotional responses to typestyle examples.

Graphic designers apply the traditional elements of art and principles of design to create visual communications, yet it is not known how people interpret the meaning of visual messages.

Conflicting typeface examples