Radiology practice is based on the implicit assumption that preference for a particular presentation mode goes hand in hand with superior performance. The present experiment tests this assumption by asking 43 radiologists in two different facilities to interpret 20 cranial computed tomography (cCT) scans in two image sizes, 14 x 14 cm and 28 x 28 cm. The radiologists were asked to identify any intracranial hemorrhages on the images. Subsequently, they were asked to indicate which size they preferred and rated the two image sizes on a continuous scale in terms of how much they liked them. The results show no correlation between diagnostic accuracy, as measured by the JAFROC figure of merit, and preference rated on a continuous scale for both image sizes (large image: r = 0.14, p = 0.38; small images: r= 0.14, p = 0.39). Similarly, there was no significant correlation between reading efficiency, i.e. the time a radiologist took to read a case, and preference rated on the continuous scale (large image: r =- 0.07, p = 0.64; small images: r = -0.04, p = 0.80). Further, no significant differences with regard to diagnostic accuracy, reading efficiency and performance could be observed when comparing the two image sizes. The results strengthen the idea that one cannot automatically assume a connection between preference for a display mode and performance with regard to it.