Subtle increases in interletter spacing facilitate the encoding of words during normal reading.

Nonetheless, we are cautious in making strong inferences from the total reading data because: i) the observed effect was numerically small in magnitude; ii) only two-thirds of the participants showed this advantage in total reading times; and iii) the effect did not reach the significance level in the item-analysis –note that the effect was barely significant (p = .029) when using a linear mixed model analysis for this comparison; and iv) the effect did not occur for total reading times or gaze durations at the local (word) level.

also in 875 other papers

Neither the effect of interletter spacing ( F 1 (2, 42) = 2.13, MSE = 606.8, η 2 = .09, p = .13; F 2 (2, 224) <1, p >.41) nor the interaction between the two factors (both Fs <; both ps>.57) approached significance.

also in 8,237 other papers