Typefaces affect how people perceive content. Content presented in a serif font appears to the reader to be more credible. [1]
It used to be the case that serif fonts were a no-no on VDUs because their low resolution made serif fonts difficult to display and less readable. This really hasn't been a problem for a long time, especially when the font size is larger, as in this case.
I tend to find that dark text on a high contrast background "jumps" around making it somewhat difficult to read for long stretches when I'm reading on my computer or phone. You might want to play with the accessibility settings in your browser to make plain white backgrounds a light gray and text a dark gray. (I have my PDF reader set to display content like this and it's infinitely more readable when I'm reading something that's several hundred pages long!) Apparently impaired contrast sensitivity is common in dyslexics [2], although I'm almost certain I'm not dyslexic! Dyslexics also have issues with serif fonts, although this isn't an issue for me.
Content presented in a serif font appears to the reader to be more credible.
This 'study' was a survey that appeared on an online version of a newspaper. The tested content was wedged inside an article that always used a serif font, on a website that always uses a serif font, in a part of the writing industry that nearly always uses a serif font.
I'm not that confident that the findings can be generalized to technical readers reading technical blogs, where the standard is sans serif. How do we know that following industry standards for the type of content isn't what made the serif fonts look more credible?
I'm not sure if this is meant as a refutation or an orthogonal comment, but yes, the typeface selected affects how people perceive content. Each typeface has a history and certain associations. It is the job of a graphic designer to align the history and associations of the typeface with the content.
This is not really an empirical matter. Serif type might make something appear more credible, but this is only by association to other things that seem credible. In this particular case, the association is to the early Renaissance, and to some extent the early 20th century, which I think now both have a somewhat mixed reputation when it comes to credibility.
That would be a refutation then, to which I would reply that I can see why one would choose a serif generally for this site – though I would not – but this particular serif does not make much sense.
It used to be the case that serif fonts were a no-no on VDUs because their low resolution made serif fonts difficult to display and less readable. This really hasn't been a problem for a long time, especially when the font size is larger, as in this case.
I tend to find that dark text on a high contrast background "jumps" around making it somewhat difficult to read for long stretches when I'm reading on my computer or phone. You might want to play with the accessibility settings in your browser to make plain white backgrounds a light gray and text a dark gray. (I have my PDF reader set to display content like this and it's infinitely more readable when I'm reading something that's several hundred pages long!) Apparently impaired contrast sensitivity is common in dyslexics [2], although I'm almost certain I'm not dyslexic! Dyslexics also have issues with serif fonts, although this isn't an issue for me.
[1] http://www.fastcodesign.com/1670556/are-some-fonts-more-beli...
[2] http://uxmovement.com/content/6-surprising-bad-practices-tha...