Studies on line length are all over the place, I think the only consistent conclusions are that shorter lines (between 30-60cpl) are beneficial for readers with

Studies on line length are all over the place, I think the only consistent conclusions are that shorter lines (between 30-60cpl) are beneficial for readers with poor literacy skills (including non-native speakers) or for people with dyslexia or some visual disorders. I bring this up because recent studies have managed to account for the saccade error associated with return sweeps and have found that reducing said error does not increase reading speed or comprehension. https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13414-019-01742-3 https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13414-019-01742-3 It's also worth noting that studies done on print line length aren't applicable to screen line length, and that most studies deal with lines of 30-100cpl, sometimes up to 130cpl, which isn't enough most websites rendered on a 16:9 screen or even the current Wikipedia design (on my 1080p monitor at least).