Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Two Spaces After Period Are Better Than One, Except Maybe They Aren't, Study Finds

posted by Fnord666 on Friday May 11 2018, @12:26PM   Printer-friendly
from the BBC-thinks-it's-a-paragraph-break-after-a-period dept.

MrPlow writes:

Submitted via IRC for Bytram

In what may be one of the most controversial studies of the year, researchers at Skidmore College—clearly triggered by a change in the American Psychological Association (APA) style book—sought to quantify the benefits of two spaces after a period at the end of a sentence. After conducting an eye-tracking experiment with 60 Skidmore students, Rebecca L. Johnson, Becky Bui, and Lindsay L. Schmitt found that two spaces at the end of a period slightly improved the processing of text during reading. The research was trumpeted by some press outlets as a vindication of two-spacers' superiority.

Source: https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/05/two-spaces-after-period-are-better-than-one-except-maybe-they-arent-study-finds/

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Two Spaces After Period Are Better Than One, Except Maybe They Aren't, Study Finds | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 81 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2, Redundant) by VLM on Friday May 11 2018, @01:36PM (5 children)

    by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Friday May 11 2018, @01:36PM (#678353)

    Lets cross out the irrelevant stuff leaving us with

    Psychological

    doesn't go with

    research

    the former only seems to produce

    trumpeted by some press outlets as a vindication

    You get better "science" from the newspaper horoscopes.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   0  
       Redundant=1, Insightful=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Redundant' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 4, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 11 2018, @04:23PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 11 2018, @04:23PM (#678442)

    Really? "VLM should be the subject of psychological research." They seem to go together just fine.

    • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 11 2018, @08:47PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 11 2018, @08:47PM (#678564)

      I'll eagerly await your paper entitled, "Effects of high levels of caffeine consumption on car analogy quality."

  • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday May 11 2018, @05:38PM (2 children)

    by DeathMonkey (1380) on Friday May 11 2018, @05:38PM (#678503) Journal

    Ah yes, the universe is unknowable therefore my BS is the same as your science.

    I'm pretty sure it is possible to study the lump of logic circuitry that lives between the ears of most humans.

    • (Score: 2) by VLM on Friday May 11 2018, @07:46PM

      by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Friday May 11 2018, @07:46PM (#678549)

      I agree with your second line, but I don't think "the academic community" in that field is rational, mostly.

    • (Score: 2) by crafoo on Friday May 11 2018, @09:54PM

      by crafoo (6639) on Friday May 11 2018, @09:54PM (#678582)

      Yes, but that field is neuroscience, not psychology. Psychology is a mix of crackpots, scammers, and really, really bad statistical studies conducted by people who have no real working knowledge of statistics.