> Since dyslexia exists on a spectrum, it's not surprising that no single dyslexia font shows consistent benefits in controlled studies.

This makes no sense. A spectrum would involve everyone having the same problem to different degrees; anything that addressed that problem would consistently show an effect.

I expect familiarity would be a big confounder either way? The first time you see the new font it might be harder than something like times new Roman if you've seen that thousands of times and gotten used to its hinting

> maybe it is just more comfortable to read, not necessarily faster?

The article says that participants in the studies preferred the traditional fonts over the dyslexia fonts. I would argue that this contradicts the thesis that they would be more comfortable to read. Moreover, the way I read the article, it wasn't just reading speed but accuracy that was tested as well.

> There are more and more cases where my personal experience seems to contradict with science. And I am not sure what to make of that.

I find that I often have to question my preconceptions when I encounter this issue. In other words, I have invested e.g. time, effort and thought into something which I thought works and it is difficult to not fall into a kind of sunken cost fallacy, i.e. my brain doesn't want me to believe it does not work, because I have invested effort into it.

> I bought her paper versions of the same books.

Then e-ink screen would provide the same benefits ie: contrast.

I believe (no evidence) that printed text is easier to read because of the mono spaced serif fonts used.

The serifs are visual cue to lead the eyes onto the next letter or word.

I don't have dyslexia, but I find it much, much more difficult to read on a screen. I think it's partly the eye strain, and partly the opportunity cost of "this device could be doing something more exciting right now".

I don’t have dyslexia, that I’m aware of, but have always had trouble tracking line to line, and end up having to reread a lot. I do have AuDHD, so that’s probably part of it. During the pandemic I took a course to improve my reading speed as something to do. One of the techniques was to use a tracer, either a finger or pen, to keep track of where you’re at and move it at the pace of the reading. As a kid I always thought kids who did this were worse at reading, so I never wanted to do it, but is immensely helpful and probably had the biggest impact of all the techniques when it came to improving my reading. I also found that one of the reasons I got distracted and bored while reading was how slow I was. As I sped up, I was able to better engage with a story (for fiction reading).

> If that's apparently not Dislexia

Dislexia is a difficulty learning to read. It is a symptom, not an underlying condition. There are different underlying conditions which lead to different processing issues, which in turn lead to dislexia. So you're almost always going to be wrong when you say "dislexia is..."