The Dvorak layout is designed to improve
touch-typing, in which the user rests their fingers on the home row. It would have less effect on other methods of typing such as
hunt-and-peck. Some studies show favorable results for the Dvorak layout in terms of speed, while others do not show any advantage, with many accusations of bias or lack of scientific rigour among researchers. The first studies were performed by Dvorak and his associates. These showed favorable results and generated accusations of bias.
[36] However, research published in 2013 by economist Ricard Torres suggests that the Dvorak layout has definite advantages.
[37]
In 1956, a study with a sample of 10 people in each group conducted by Earle Strong of the U.S.
General Services Administration found Dvorak no more efficient than QWERTY
[38] and claimed it would be too costly to retrain the employees.
[34] The failure of the study to show any benefit to switching, along with its illustration of the considerable cost of switching, discouraged businesses and governments from making the switch.
[39] This study was similarly criticised as being biased in favor of the QWERTY control group.
[8]
In the 1990s, economists Stan Liebowitz and Stephen E. Margolis wrote articles in the
Journal of Law and Economics[36] and
Reason magazine[15] where they rejected Dvorak proponents' claims that the dominance of the QWERTY is due to
market failure brought on by QWERTY's early adoption, writing, "[T]he evidence in the standard history of Qwerty versus Dvorak is flawed and incomplete. [..] The most dramatic claims are traceable to Dvorak himself; and the best-documented experiments, as well as recent ergonomic studies, suggest little or no advantage for the Dvorak keyboard."
[36][40]