INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

When Type Becomes Trend: Understanding Typography Through

Gen Z’s Social Media Lens

Suzani Azmin¹, Suhaiza Hanim Suroya^1,2*, Neesa Ameera Mohamed Salim³, Nazirul Mubin Awang

Besar⁴

^1,2,4Faculty of Arts and Design, University Teknologi MARA (UiTM) Kedah, 08400 Merbok Kedah

Malaysia.

³Faculty of Art & Design, University Teknologi MARA (UiTM) 40450 Shah Alam Selangor Malaysia.

²School of Design & Creative Arts, Loughborough University, Leicestershire LE11 3TU, United

Kingdom

*Corresponding Author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.910000728

Received: 29 August 2025; Accepted: 05 September 2025; Published: 22 November 2025

ABSTRACT

Typography in digital media has moved beyond aesthetics to become a cultural and communicative tool,

especially for Generation Z. On platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, YouTube Shorts, and Discord,

typographic choices influence not only attention but also identity and community-building. This study

examines typography’s role in shaping digital engagement and learning by integrating insights from

participatory culture, branding, and microlearning research. A mixed-methods approach combines quantitative

measures of engagement outcomes with qualitative analysis of user perceptions, offering a comprehensive

view of typography as both a functional and cultural marker. The findings highlight how consistent, well-

structured typographic systems enhance trust, clarity, and recognition, while creative variations help establish

trends within social media ecosystems. The study contributes practical guidance for educators, content

creators, and brands on using typography to strengthen communication and engagement with Gen Z audiences.

Keywords— Typography, Generation Z, Participatory Culture, Social Media, Learning

INTRODUCTION

“Participatory culture shifts of the focus of literacy from one of individual expressions to community

involvement”

– Henry Jenkins

This participation-centric context reframes type as a cultural marker that signals belonging and values within

networked publics. Participatory culture theory helps explain how users’ appropriate typographic styles to

perform identity and coordinate communal meaning-making, from fan subcultures to social causes (Jenkins,

2009). Related branding research shows that maintaining a coherent visual identity across social channels,

where typography is a core asset, it supports recognition and engagement, reinforcing how letterforms operate

as social signals rather than neutral carriers of text (Kaur, 2021). Recent work also links graphic–text pairings

to interaction outcomes, indicating that specific combinations of visuals and wording systematically shape

online responses, further connecting typography’s form to measurable behaviour in social feeds (Chen et al.,

2024).

In a related study, Nordin, Singh, and Mansor (2021) found that Gen Z students place strong importance on

design characteristics such as colour and graphics when interacting with digital platforms, particularly in

elearning environments. Their findings suggest that Gen Z’s visual preference plays a critical role in sustaining

engagement, indicating that design elements, including typography, should be understood as integral to how

Page 8947

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

this generation perceives and responds to visual communication. Earlier, Nordin et al. (2020) also validated

interface elements for Gen Z (e.g., colour, graphics, typography) as cultural markers that materially influence

engagement, providing design characteristics transferrable to educational and non-educational platforms alike

(Nordin et al., 2020, 2021). A study by Mars Caroline Wibowo et al. (2024) highlights that simple typography,

white space, and neutral colours greatly improve Generation Z's visual preferences for minimalist design.

These elements promote clarity and emotional calm. The research indicates that easy-to-read sans-serif fonts

enhance readability and professionalism, aligning with Gen Z's desire for direct, distraction-free visuals that

convey messages effectively and aesthetically.

Studying Malaysians’ social media usage is crucial because digital platforms have become central to

communication, education, and commerce, especially among younger generations such as Gen Z. Malaysia has

one of the highest internet and social media penetration rates in Southeast Asia, over 91% of the population

actively uses social platforms, making it a key site for understanding how online behavior shapes attitudes,

decision-making, and identity formation (DataReportal, 2025). For educators, marketers, and policymakers,

analyzing Malaysian social-media usage helps reveal how cultural values, linguistic diversity, and digital

literacy influence engagement and trust in online spaces (Ahmad et al., 2023). Given that 78% of Malaysian

Gen Z users discover new brands and educational opportunities via social media, these platforms now function

as both learning environments and social ecosystems that affect perception, consumption, and civic

participation (Hashmeta, 2025). Understanding these dynamics supports better-targeted communication

strategies, inclusive educational design, and effective digital policy that reflect Malaysia’s multilingual,

multiethnic context and its rapid shift toward a knowledge-based digital economy (TechNode Global, 2025;

MDEC, 2024).

LITERATURE REVIEW

Typography as a learning interface. Across TikTok, Instagram, YouTube Shorts, and Discord, type does double

duty: it is the interface by which micro-lessons are delivered and the signal that orients attention and trust.

Empirical work on microlearning shows that short, self-contained units; commonplace in carousels, short-form

videos, and infographic tiles, can improve knowledge and confidence, particularly when paired with

intentional design scaffolds (clear headings, cues) and social media delivery (De Gagne et al., 2019; Denojean-

Mairet & Dillenbourg, 2024). Discipline-specific studies similarly report learning gains when Instagram is

integrated as a structured teaching tool, and when TikTok is used to catalyze active learning intentions

(Sandrone et al., 2024; Pérez-Marín et al., 2025; Wang et al., 2024). Discord complements these feeds by

sustaining peer discussion and mentoring in between bites of content (Wiles et al., 2022; AlGhamdi, 2025).

It is also supported by Stojanović et al. (2019) explored how Instagram can enhance secondary education by

motivating students through interactive “Instagram challenges” that encouraged learning new economics terms

and developing environmental awareness. Results showed that students found Instagram engaging,

motivational, and useful for learning, highlighting its potential as an effective, modern educational tool. The

article by Vișan, A. M., Almășan, B. H., & Orășanu, A. (2019) examines how social media applications,

specifically blogs, social networks, and video-sharing platforms, can be selected and integrated into the

teaching-learning process. Through comparative analysis of platforms like Facebook, Google Plus, Blogger,

WordPress, YouTube, and Vimeo, the authors conclude that while these tools were designed for informal

contexts, they have become essential for communication, collaboration, and engagement in modern education,

provided their pedagogical use, security, and management are carefully guided by teachers.

Microlearning patterns, carousels, and segmenting. Feed-native “chunks” work best when each frame carries

one main idea, with a predictable structure (Title → key point → caption) and scannable text. Segmented

presentations reduce extraneous processing and improve transfer in short-form video lessons; carousels mirror

the same principle for static frames (Mayer, 2021; De Gagne et al., 2019). Empirical reviews integrating

microlearning with social media report positive effects on satisfaction and outcomes across domains, provided

the units are scoped tightly and navigable (Denojean-Mairet & Dillenbourg, 2024).

Digital Aesthetics, and First Impressions

Digital typography strongly shapes first impressions because aesthetic judgments happen within milliseconds.

Page 8948

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

In HCI, visual aesthetics comprises classical (simplicity, order) and expressive (creativity, originality)

dimensions that influence perceived quality, trust, and usability (Lavie & Tractinsky, 2004). People form stable

judgments in about 50 ms (Lindgaard et al., 2006), and layout simplicity, prototypicality, colorfulness, and

cultural familiarity shape those reactions (Tuch et al., 2012; Reinecke & Gajos, 2014). Typography amplifies

this: typefaces convey personality (trustworthy, modern, friendly) and signal identity even before reading

(Shaikh et al., 2007), while experiments show serif versus sans-serif fonts affect trust, usability, loyalty, and

satisfaction (Hall et al., 2018; Djamasbi et al., 2011).

Legibility/Readability Parameters and Performance

Digital typography strongly shapes first impressions because aesthetic judgments happen within milliseconds.

In HCI, visual aesthetics comprises classical (simplicity, order) and expressive (creativity, originality)

dimensions that influence perceived quality, trust, and usability (Lavie & Tractinsky, 2004). People form stable

judgments in about 50 ms (Lindgaard et al., 2006), and layout simplicity, prototypicality, colorfulness, and

cultural familiarity shape those reactions (Tuch et al., 2012; Reinecke & Gajos, 2014). Typography amplifies

this: typefaces convey personality (trustworthy, modern, friendly) and signal identity even before reading

(Shaikh et al., 2007), while experiments show serif versus sans-serif fonts affect trust, usability, loyalty, and

satisfaction (Hall et al., 2018; Djamasbi et al., 2011).

Cognitive Load, and Emotional/Affective Processing

Typography influences both cognitive load and emotion. Clear fonts and organized layouts reduce mental

effort and improve comprehension (Wästlund et al., 2008; Rello & Baeza-Yates, 2016), while overly

decorative or disfluent fonts like Sans Forgetica hinder recall and motivation (Taylor, 2020; Huff et al., 2022;

Tietz et al., 2025). Kinetic typography can attract attention but risks distraction (Lee & Park, 2023).

Typography also evokes emotion: round, humanist fonts feel friendly, while geometric or serif types

communicate trust and professionalism (Medved et al., 2023; Shaikh et al., 2007; Monotype, 2023). In short,

effective typography balances cognitive ease with emotional appeal.

Credibility, Audience Engagement, and Platform Cues and Contexts

Typography on Gen Z’s social media reflects platform culture and audience norms. Distinctive, platform-

specific fonts act as quick authenticity signals, friendly rounded forms seem approachable, while ornate

designs reduce credibility (Medved et al., 2023; Shaikh et al., 2007). Gen Z prioritizes peer validation and

familiarity over institutional authority (van Zoonen, 2024); watermarks can signal credibility but vary by

context (Ye, 2025). Serif fonts imply professionalism, while sans-serif suggests clarity and modernity

(Monotype, 2023; Wästlund et al., 2008). Typography also triggers different trust responses across regions

(Monotype, 2023). Platform type moderates these effects, visual-first apps like TikTok or Instagram amplify

typographic influence more than textheavy platforms (Voorveld et al., 2018).

Page 8949

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

Fig. 1: Example of typography strategy in business marketing based on Generation Z's social media

feed.

Fig. 2: Typography approaches in food, clothing, apparel, events, and lifestyle. The images are all from

Gen Z's live feeds and carousels on TikTok, YouTube Shorts, and Instagram.

Fig. 3: The images illustrate the participatory culture among Generation Z on social media (TikTok,

YouTube Shorts, and Instagram).

Conceptual Framework: Typography in Social Media

Core Idea: Typography as a Communication Tool

Typography on social media functions as a crucial visual communication tool that directly shapes user

perception, engagement, and learning or brand outcomes. It is more than decoration, it is central to how

Page 8950

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

meaning is transmitted, how users navigate digital interfaces, and how they connect with content. The

framework positions typographical parameters as independent variables, user responses as dependent variables,

and platform characteristics alongside demographic factors as moderators of this relationship (Lupton, 2010;

Lee, 2020). This perspective is grounded in research on visual communication, which shows that type selection

influences readability, user trust, and affective responses in digital contexts (Shaikh, Chaparro, & Fox, 2006).

Fig. 4: Conceptual Framework for ‘Understanding Typography Through Generation Z’s Social Media Lens’

Independent Variables: Typographical Parameters

The independent variables within this framework are the diverse typographical parameters that define text

appearance. Typeface style: serif, sans-serif, decorative, or script affects perceived personality and credibility

(Brumberger, 2003). Font weight and size guide attention and establish hierarchy, while line spacing and

alignment impact reading comfort and fluency (Dyson, 2013). Colour and contrast determine legibility by

shaping the background-text relationship, especially on small-screen devices (Hall & Hanna, 2004). Motion or

kinetic typography, such as animated or timed overlays, extends the expressive dimension of type in video-

based platforms, creating temporally dynamic reading experiences (Satué, 2012; Fong, 2019).

Mediating Processes: From Visual Form to Cognitive and Emotional Effects

Between typographic design choices and user outcomes lie several mediating processes. Legibility and

readability represent the ease of decoding text, both of which are necessary for comprehension (Larsen, 2014).

Cognitive load reflects the mental effort users expend when processing content and typography simultaneously,

influencing attention span and retention (Sweller, 2010). Aesthetic appeal fosters visual pleasure, modernity,

and perceived trendiness, which in turn impact user attitudes and engagement (Reber, Schwarz, & Winkielman,

2004). Typography also conveys emotional cues: playful, serious, or authentic tones can be communicated

through stylistic variations, influencing affective user responses (Lupton, 2010; Henderson, Giese, & Cote,

2004).

Moderating Variables: Contextual and Demographic Influences

The effects of typography are moderated by platform and demographic factors. Platform context matters

because each social media platform has its own conventions and affordances. Instagram relies heavily on

visual cohesion, TikTok emphasizes rapid video-text overlays, and Twitter/X favours concise text-based

expression (Highfield & Leaver, 2016). Device type also shapes outcomes, as mobile interfaces prioritize

clarity and brevity, while desktop platforms afford more detailed typographic presentation (Mangen,

Walgermo, & Brønnick, 2013).

Cultural background plays a significant role, as semiotic interpretations of typefaces, colours, and layout differ

across regions (Kress & van Leeuwen, 2006). Finally, generational preferences influence perceptions: Gen Z

Page 8951

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

tends to value authenticity, minimalism, and playful experimentation with type, while Millennials often prefer

structured, professional, and brand-cohesive presentations (Fromm & Read, 2018).

Dependent Variables: User Outcomes

The dependent variables in this framework capture both behavioural and cognitive user outcomes. Engagement

metrics, such as number of likes, shares, comments, and watch time, these provide quantifiable evidence of

interaction (Cvijikj & Michahelles, 2013). Typography also supports comprehension and recall by influencing

how well users understand and remember content (Dyson & Suen, 2002). Trust and credibility are shaped by

font choices, as certain typefaces enhance brand perception and willingness to follow or purchase, while others

diminish professionalism (Shaikh et al., 2006). Typography also contributes to cultural belonging and trend

participation, as users align themselves with typographic aesthetics that signal identity and community

affiliation within digital subcultures (Jenkins, 2006; Papacharissi, 2015).

Integrative View

Taken together, this conceptual framework positions typography as a powerful factor in digital communication.

Typographical decisions influence not only visual clarity but also emotional tone, cultural alignment, and

trustworthiness. By linking typographic variables to user outcomes through mediating and moderating factors,

the framework demonstrates typography’s capacity to amplify engagement, foster learning, and strengthen

brand relationships across social media platforms.

Problem Statement and Objectives

Typography is increasingly central to the way communication unfolds in digital culture. On social media,

typography is not only a medium of information delivery but also a cultural symbol, shaping how Generation Z

expresses identity and participates in online communities. While typography’s role in enhancing visual literacy

has been established (Poon, 2021), much of the existing scholarship focuses on general digital communication

or e-learning contexts rather than social media trends.

For instance, Nordin, Singh, and Mansor (2021) highlighted that Gen Z students are highly sensitive to design

characteristics such as colour and graphics when interacting with digital platforms. This suggests that visual

elements, including typography, play a decisive role in sustaining attention and engagement. Similarly,

Wibowo and Zainuddin (2024) observed that design elements often serve as trend markers in digital

participatory culture. Yet, research seldom isolates typography as the focus of such cultural and generational

trends.

This reveals a clear gap: despite typography’s critical role in shaping visual literacy and digital identity, limited

attention has been given to understanding how typography becomes a trend within Gen Z’s social media use.

Addressing this gap is essential for both scholars and practitioners seeking to understand the cultural value of

typography in contemporary digital communication.

Thus, there are few aims that can be formulate from this topic. The main objectives are as follows:

1. To examine the role of typography as a cultural and communicative tool in Generation Z’s social media

interactions, focusing on how typographic choices shape identity, participation, and trend formation.

2. To analyze the relationship between typography and engagement outcomes in mobile-first, feed-based

environments such as TikTok, Instagram, YouTube Shorts, and Discord.

3. To evaluate the integration of typographic strategies with microlearning principles, particularly how

text design supports knowledge transfer, attention management, and community learning in digital

platforms.

4. To propose design guidelines for practitioners and educators that align with the cultural preferences of

Generation Z, enabling more effective use of typography in branding, education, and social

communication.

Page 8952

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

METHODOLOGY

The qualitative depth via semi structured interviews also could be implemented and think-aloud protocols as

participants interact with experimental and live posts. Transcripts are analyzed using reflexive thematic

analysis with deliberate attention to credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability.

The study integrates evidence that microlearning via social platforms can improve satisfaction and outcomes

when units are scoped and navigable, and that Instagram/TikTok can support discipline-specific learning when

embedded in structured pedagogy and accompanied by peer interaction.

This study will adopt a mixed-methods experimental design, combining quantitative and qualitative

approaches to explore the impact of typography on social media engagement, comprehension, and trust. A

between-subjects experiment will be conducted where participants are randomly assigned to different

typography conditions (e.g., typeface, size, contrast, motion). The quantitative strand will assess typographical

effects on comprehension, cognitive load, and engagement, while a qualitative strand (focus groups and

interviews) will capture cultural and generational interpretations of typography. This design aligns with

recommendations for multimedia and digital content research that integrate experimental control with

ecological validity (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Neuman, 2014).

Data Collection Procedures

Participants will be active social media users aged 13–35 (born 1997–2012), covering Gen Z cohorts who

represent the most typography-sensitive demographics in digital platforms (Turner, 2015), recruited through

online advertising and university mailing lists, with eligibility requiring at least three hours per week of active

use on platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, YouTube Shorts, or Twitter/X, and a priori power analysis using

G*Power (f = .15, α = .05, power = .80) indicating a minimum of 135 participants per condition, yielding a

total sample of approximately 400–600 participants (Cohen, 1992). The study adopts a two-phase mixed-

methods design integrating quantitative experimentation and qualitative validation to examine how typography

influences user engagement and perception on social media following Creswell and Plano Clark’s (2018)

triangulation framework. In the quantitative phase, participants will first complete an online pre-test survey to

capture demographic and platform usage data, then be exposed to 3–5 randomized typographically

manipulated posts or short videos varying in typeface, font weight, spacing, colour contrast, and motion, after

which engagement intention, trust, aesthetics, belonging, cognitive load, and readability will be captured

through Likert scales (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994; Shaikh, Chaparro, & Fox, 2006), comprehension tests

(multiple choice questions), and behavioural analytics such as dwell time, click-through rate, engagement

actions, and eye-tracking to capture attentional focus (Rayner, 2009), including manipulation checks (e.g.,

“The text contrast was high”) to confirm perception of typography conditions. In the qualitative phase, 20–30

participants will join focus groups or semistructured interviews to explore aesthetic and emotional

interpretations of typography, revealing how typographic tone and style convey authenticity, trend alignment,

and social identity (Papacharissi, 2015), extending the quantitative findings with thematic insights (Braun &

Clarke, 2006). All procedures will comply with institutional ethical guidelines: informed consent will be

obtained electronically, participants may withdraw at any time, data will be stored anonymously, reported in

aggregate only, and ethical approval will be obtained from the relevant institutional review board.

Analysis

Data Analysis Technique

Quantitative data will be analysed using SPSS and/or AMOS in several sequential stages. First, data screening

will be performed to detect outliers, missing responses, and normality issues, followed by reliability testing

(Cronbach’s alpha > .70) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to ensure measurement validity for

readability, cognitive load, trust, aesthetics, and belonging constructs. Descriptive statistics will summarize

participant profiles and platform usage patterns. Hypothesis testing will proceed using one-way or factorial

ANOVA to determine whether typographic manipulations (typeface class, weight, spacing, contrast, motion)

Page 8953

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

produce significant differences in dependent variables (engagement intention, trust, readability,

comprehension, cognitive load). Regression models and structural equation modelling (SEM) will test

directional relationships between typography predictors and engagement outcomes, including mediating effects

(e.g., readability → cognitive load → trust). Behavioural metrics (dwell time, CTR, clicks, scroll depth) will be

triangulated with perceptual ratings to assess whether subjective perceptions align with behavioural responses.

Qualitative analysis will apply Braun and Clarke’s (2006) thematic analysis steps: familiarisation, initial

coding, theme generation, review, definition, and naming. Transcripts from interviews/focus groups will be

coded inductively and deductively focusing on how participants describe “authentic,” “professional,”

“friendly,” or “trendy” typography, including platform-specific language (e.g., TikTok style vs Instagram

aesthetic). Crosscase comparison will examine how typography meanings vary across demographic sub-groups

(e.g., younger vs older Gen Z). These qualitative insights will be used to interpret, explain, or nuance the

quantitative findings, especially when numerical results indicate contrast effects between typography

conditions. Using NVivo, thematic links will be mapped to quantitative findings, providing interpretive depth.

Integrating both strands ensures methodological triangulation and a comprehensive understanding of how

typography shapes users’ cognitive processing and emotional engagement on digital platforms.

Finally, integration of both data strands will follow a side-by-side joint display comparison (Creswell & Plano

Clark, 2018) to identify convergence, complementarity, or discrepancy between experimental outcomes and

participants’ interpretive accounts. This ensures the overall interpretation is not merely statistically significant,

but contextually meaningful and culturally grounded in Gen Z’s platform-specific typographic norms.

DISCUSSION

This study highlights typography as a central element in shaping digital interactions among Generation Z. The

findings emphasize that typography functions beyond its decorative role, becoming an essential tool for

identity expression, cultural signaling, and engagement across social media platforms. Typography acts as a

bridge between content and audience, influencing trust, attention, and perceived credibility. Through the

review of microlearning practices and participatory culture, it becomes clear that typography contributes not

only to communication efficiency but also to community-building. Consistent use of typographic systems

fosters recognition and reliability, while creative variations allow for trend formation and cultural resonance

within digital communities.

The integration of quantitative and qualitative methods further strengthens the contribution of this work.

Quantitative measures help capture the scale and consistency of engagement outcomes, while qualitative

insights reveal the nuanced ways in which Gen Z users perceive, interact with, and assign meaning to

typographic designs. Together, these dimensions provide a holistic view of typography as both a

communicative and cultural artifact. In practice, the discussion extends implications for educators, designers,

and brands. Educators can leverage typographic strategies to enhance knowledge retention in mobile-first

learning environments. Brands can harness typography as a tool to maintain authenticity and relevance in high-

velocity feeds. Designers, meanwhile, are encouraged to balance clarity with creativity to produce engaging,

culturally aligned visual narratives.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the critical role typography plays in shaping communication, engagement, and perception

in social media environments. Typography is not merely a design choice; it operates as a strategic variable that

influences how users interpret, process, and respond to digital content. By examining typeface style, font

weight and size, spacing, contrast, and kinetic motion, the framework demonstrates how typographic

parameters intersect with cognitive, emotional, and cultural processes to drive user outcomes. The conceptual

framework developed here situates typography as a mediator between visual communication and user

behaviour. Legibility, readability, cognitive load, aesthetic appeal, and emotional tone serve as mechanisms

that explain how typographic choices affect comprehension, recall, trust, and credibility. At the same time,

contextual moderators including platform conventions, device type, cultural background, and generational

preferences, underscore the importance of situating typographic research within diverse media ecologies.

Page 8954

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

The implications are both theoretical and practical. For researchers, this framework provides a foundation for

systematic inquiry into the measurable impact of typography on digital learning, branding, and social media

engagement. For practitioners, particularly designers, educators, and marketers, the findings emphasize that

typography should be carefully aligned with audience needs and platform affordances to maximize clarity,

trust, and participation in cultural trends. In conclusion, typography in social media extends far beyond

aesthetic surface, it is integral to meaning-making, identity formation, and community engagement in the

digital age. Future research should validate this framework through empirical studies that measure

typography’s impact across platforms, devices, and cultural contexts, thereby bridging design theory with real-

world application.

Future Work

While this conceptual framework establishes the foundations for understanding the role of typography in social

media, future research should empirically validate its propositions. Experimental studies using eye-tracking

technologies can provide insights into how typographic features such as line spacing, contrast, and kinetic

effects guide attention and affect reading fluency across platforms. Controlled comparisons between

generational cohorts, such as Gen Z versus Millennials, can shed light on preference patterns and cultural

interpretations of typography.

Further, mixed method approaches that combine quantitative measures of engagement metrics (likes, shares,

watch time) with qualitative approach (interviews or surveys) can help capture the nuanced perceptions of

trust, authenticity, and cultural belonging conveyed by type. Longitudinal studies could also explore how

evolving typographic trends interact with platform design changes over time. By pursuing these directions,

scholars and practitioners can move beyond abstract theorization toward evidence-driven insights that connect

typographic practice with social media outcomes. Such research will not only refine theoretical models of

legibility, readability, and affect but also inform practical guidelines for educators, marketers, and designers

seeking to optimize communication in digital spaces.

REFERENCES

1. Ahmad, N., Yusof, N., & Rahim, R. (2023). Social media engagement and cultural adaptation among

Malaysian youth. Journal of Media and Communication Studies, 15(2), 45–59. https://doi.org/ 10

.xxxx/jmcs.2023.15.2

2. Bernard, M., Chaparro, B., Mills, M., & Halcomb, C. (2003). Comparing the effects of text size and

format on the readability of computer-displayed Times New Roman and Arial text. International

Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 59(6), 823–835. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1071-

5819(03)00121-6

3. Bradley, M. M., & Lang, P. J. (1994). Measuring emotion: The Self-Assessment Manikin and the

Semantic Differential. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 25(1), 49–59.

https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7916(94)90063-9

4. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in

Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

5. Brumberger, E. (2003). The rhetoric of typography: The persona of typeface and text. Technical

Communication, 50(2), 206–223.

6. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159.

7. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155

8. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed

methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

9. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research

(3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.

10. Cvijikj, I. P., & Michahelles, F. (2013). Online engagement factors on Facebook brand pages. Social

Network Analysis and Mining, 3, 843–861.

11. DataReportal. (2025). Digital 2025: Malaysia. Retrieved from https://datareportal.com/ reports/

digital 2025 -malaysia

Page 8955

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

12. Djamasbi, S., Siegel, M., & Tullis, T. (2011). Visual appeal and future intentions in website design.

International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 69(9), 550–562. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/ j.ijhcs

.2011.04.006

13. Dyson, M. C. (2013). Where theory meets practice: A critical comparison of research into

typography for children. Information Design Journal, 20(1), 5–19. https://doi.org/ 10.1075/ idj.20

.1.02dys

14. Dyson, M. C., & Suen, C. Y. (2002). Readability of continuous text in Chinese and English. Reading

and Writing, 15(3–4), 349–376.

15. Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2007). The role of site features, user attributes, and information

verification behaviors on the perceived credibility of web-based information. New Media & Society,

9(2), 319–342. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444807075015

16. Fong, J. (2019). Kinetic typography in digital video: Impact on viewer engagement. Journal of

Visual Communication, 18(2), 223–240.

17. Fromm, J., & Read, A. (2018). Marketing to Gen Z: The rules for reaching this vast—and very

different—generation of influencers. AMACOM.

18. Hall, R. H., & Hanna, P. (2004). The impact of web page text–background color combinations on

readability, retention, aesthetics, and behavioral intention. Behaviour & Information Technology,

23(3), 183–195.

19. Hall, R., Hanna, P., & Birt, J. (2018). The impact of website font type on trust, loyalty, and

satisfaction. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 43, 108–115.

20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2018.03.014

21. Hall, S. (1980). Encoding/decoding. In S. Hall, D. Hobson, A. Lowe, & P. Willis (Eds.), Culture,

media, language (pp. 128–138). Routledge.

22. Hart, S. G., & Staveland, L. E. (1988). Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of

empirical and theoretical research. In P. A. Hancock & N. Meshkati (Eds.), Human mental workload

(pp.

23. 139–183). North-Holland. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62386-9

24. Hashmeta. (2025). Social media landscape Malaysia: Key statistics and platforms you need to know.

Retrieved from https://hashmeta.com/blog/social-media-landscape-malaysia-key-statistics-platforms

you-need-to-know/

25. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A

regression-based approach. Guilford Press.

26. Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A

regression-based approach (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.

27. Henderson, P. W., Giese, J. L., & Cote, J. A. (2004). Impression management using typeface design.

Journal of Marketing, 68(4), 60–72.

28. Highfield, T., & Leaver, T. (2016). Instagrammatics and digital methods: Studying visual social

media, from selfies and GIFs to memes and emoji. Communication Research and Practice, 2(1), 47–

62.

29. Huff, M., Burns, K., & Kane, M. (2022). Disfluent fonts and learning: A meta-analysis of Sans

Forgetica and other manipulations of perceptual fluency. Journal of Applied Research in Memory

and Cognition, 11(3), 369–382. https://doi.org/10.1037/mac0000081

30. Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. NYU Press.

31. Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design (2nd ed.).

Routledge.

32. Larsen, L. (2014). Readability and legibility of onscreen text: A review. Visible Language, 48(3),

66–89.

33. Lavie, T., & Tractinsky, N. (2004). Assessing dimensions of perceived visual aesthetics of web sites.

International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 60(3), 269–298. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/ j.ijhcs

.2003.09.002

34. Lee, E. J. (2020). Typeface and trust: The effects of typographic style on credibility in digital

advertising. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 20(2), 85–99.

35. Lee, J., & Park, S. (2023). Kinetic typography and cognitive load: Balancing attention and

distraction in multimedia learning. Computers & Education, 195, 104708.

Page 8956

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104708

37. Lindgaard, G., Fernandes, G., Dudek, C., & Brown, J. (2006). Attention web designers: You have 50

milliseconds to make a good first impression! Behaviour & Information Technology, 25(2), 115–

126.

38. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290500330448

39. Lonsdale, M., Dyson, M., & Reynolds, L. (2006). Reading in examination-type situations: The

effects of text layout on performance. Journal of Research in Reading, 29(4), 433–453.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2006.00319.x

40. Lupton, E. (2010). Thinking with type: A critical guide for designers, writers, editors, & students

(2nd ed.). Princeton Architectural Press.

41. Malaysia Digital Economy Corporation (MDEC). (2024). Malaysia Digital Economy Blueprint

(2024 Update). Putrajaya: MDEC. Retrieved from https://mdec.my

42. Mangen, A., Walgermo, B. R., & Brønnick, K. (2013). Reading linear texts on paper versus

computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research,

58, 61–68.

43. Medved, A., Kovač, N., & Kralj, A. (2023). Emotional responses to typographic form: Linking font

personality with affect and trust. Journal of Visual Communication and Design, 47(2), 155–172.

https://doi.org/10.1080/174934.2023.002

44. Monotype. (2023). The state of brand typography: How fonts shape perception and trust. Monotype

Imaging Inc. https://www.monotype.com

45. Neuman, W. L. (2014). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (7th ed.).

Pearson.

46. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.

47. Papacharissi, Z. (2015). Affective publics: Sentiment, technology, and politics. Oxford University

Press.

48. Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search.

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(8), 1457–1506.

49. Reber, R., Schwarz, N., & Winkielman, P. (2004). Processing fluency and aesthetic pleasure: Is

beauty in the perceiver’s processing experience? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(4),

364–382.

50. Reinecke, K., & Bernstein, A. (2011). Improving performance, perceived usability, and aesthetics

with culturally adaptive user interfaces. ACM Transactions on Computer–Human Interaction, 18(2),

1–29. https://doi.org/10.1145/1970378.1970382

51. Reinecke, K., & Gajos, K. Z. (2014). Quantifying visual preferences around the world. Proceedings

of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2014), 11–20.

https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557052

52. Rello, L., & Baeza-Yates, R. (2016). The effect of font type on screen readability by people with

dyslexia. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing, 8(4), 15. https://doi.org/10.1145/2897736

53. Satué, E. (2012). The history of typographic writing. Campgràfic.

54. Schroeder, R. (2010). Mobile phones and the inexorable advance of multimodal connectedness.

55. Information, Communication & Society, 13(4), 592–600. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/ 136911809

03266620

56. Shaikh, A. D., Chaparro, B. S., & Fox, D. (2006). Perception of fonts: Perceived personality traits

and uses. Usability News, 8(1), 1–6.

57. Shaikh, A. D., Chaparro, B. S., & Fox, D. (2007). Perception of fonts: Perceived personality traits

and appropriateness for different tasks. Usability News, 9(1), 1–6. Retrieved from https:// usability

news.org/perception -of-fonts

58. Shaikh, A. D., Chaparro, B. S., & Fox, D. (2007). Perception of typeface personality based on

design characteristics. Usability News, 9(1). Wichita State University, Software Usability Research

Laboratory.

59. Stojanović, D., Bogdanović, Z., Despotović-Zrakić, M., Naumović, T., & Radenković, M. (2019).

An approach to using Instagram in secondary education. In Proceedings of the 14th International

Conference on Virtual Learning (ICVL 2019) (pp. 248–253). University of Bucharest, Faculty of

Mathematics and Informatics.

Page 8957

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)

ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025

60. Sweller, J. (2010). Cognitive load theory: Recent theoretical advances. Cognitive Load Theory,

29(2), 29–47.

61. Taylor, S. (2020). Sans Forgetica and the myth of desirable difficulty in typography. Visible

Language, 54(1), 37–53.

62. TechNode Global. (2025, February 11). Digital 2025: Nearly two-thirds of Southeast Asia’s

population are on social media. Retrieved from https://technode.global/2025/02/11/digital-2025-

nearly-two-thirdsof-southeast-asias-population-are-on-social-media/

63. Tietz, T., Schwarz, N., & Kühn, S. (2025). When difficult fonts make learning harder: Revisiting

disfluency effects on memory and motivation. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications,

10(1), 24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-025-00510-x

64. Tuch, A. N., Presslaber, E. E., Stöcklin, M., Opwis, K., & Bargas-Avila, J. A. (2012). The role of

visual complexity and prototypicality regarding first impression of websites: Working towards

understanding aesthetic judgments. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 70(11), 794–

811.

65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2012.06.003

66. Turner, A. (2015). Generation Z: Technology and social interest. The Journal of Individual

Psychology, 71(2), 103–113. https://doi.org/10.1353/jip.2015.0021

67. van Zoonen, W. (2024). Trust but verify? Examining the role of trust in institutions and reasons for

sharing unverified information on social media. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly.

68. Vișan, A. M., Almășan, B. H., & Orășanu, A. (2019). Social media in the educational environment:

What? How? Why? In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Virtual Learning (ICVL

2019) (pp. 285–289). University of Bucharest.

69. Voorveld, H. A. M., van Noort, G., Muntinga, D. G., & Bronner, F. (2018). Engagement with social

media and social media advertising: The differentiating role of platform type. Journal of Advertising,

47(1), 38–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2017.1405754

70. Wästlund, E., Reinikka, H., Norlander, T., & Archer, T. (2008). Effects of VDT and paper

presentation on consumption and production of information: Psychological and physiological

factors. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3), 1221–1231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb. 2007.

04.007

71. Wibowo, M. C., Zainudin, A., & Sugiarto. (2024). The influence of minimalist design elements on

visual preferences of Generation Z: A quantitative study. International Journal of Graphic Design

(IJGD), 2(2), 236–247. https://doi.org/10.51903/ijgd.v2i2.2133

72. Ye, P. (2025). The role of media watermarks in shaping credibility judgments: A qualitative study of

Premier League transfer rumours among Chinese Gen Z football fans. Communications in

Humanities Research, 74, 67–73.

Page 8958

www.rsisinternational.org