Warning design

Since the early 1980s there has been an increased interest in research on warnings. This chapter has several objectives. First, we describe the purpose of warnings and where warnings fit with other safety considerations, such as design and guarding. Next, we present a model that incorporates both communication and information-processing concepts, which is characteristic of theoretical orientations that have guided much of the warning research. The research and application issues have generally focused on two themes: design factors and non-design factors that influence warning effectiveness. Third, we review the progress and status of research and application, with an emphasis on identifying those factors that appear to be most important in determining warning effectiveness. Finally, we conclude with a discussion of some of the challenges and opportunities facing warning designers and researchers in the future.

The purpose of this experiment was to examine the effects of warning quality and human factors expert testimony on decision making in consumer product injury cases. Participants read summaries of consumer product accidents, where a no, poor or good warning was present. In two conditions, human factors (HF) expert testimony was included, giving an opinion on the quality of the product warnings. Participants allocated percentages of responsibility to the manufacturer, retailer, and consumer, as if they were jury members assigned to the cases. Results showed differences in allocations of responsibility among conditions. Manufacturers were allocated more responsibility when there was no warning on the product or when a poor warning was present and a HF expert testified that a better warning could have been used. Allocations did not differ between poor and good warning conditions, possibly because participants viewing poor warnings lacked knowledge of the way a good warning would look. T...

The study consisted of three objectives: (a) to test the relative prominence and conspicuousness of a warning required by US law to be conspicuous; (b) to explore whether or not the conspicuousness of the said warning can be enhanced graphically; and (c) to develop preliminary data for power analysis that would guide decisions related to sample size in future studies. Seventeen subjects viewed four over-the-counter drug packages (each with a different style of warning)along with
five other products while wearing an eye-tracking device. Four styles of warning were used on the over-the-counter drug packages: no outline and no fill, outline and no fill, no outline and fill, and outline and fill. The surface area and the placement of the warnings were held constant across all four designs andwere consistent with those on commercially available products. Collected data were broken into five zones: warning, brand name, strength, product benefit, and net weight. Despite the fact that US law requires it to be conspicuous, the tested warning was significantly less noticeable than the brand name (objective one) for all dependent variables analyzed (a=0.05). No significant difference was indicated for the varied warning designs (objective two). This could be because not much can be done to enhance prominence when constrained to the limited space that is typically used for such warnings or because of the limited sample size. Power calculations suggest that a sample size of nearly200 subjects would be required to detect a 2.5-seconds mean difference at 80% con
fidence (objective three).

Since the early 1980s there has been an increased interest in research on warnings. This chapter has several objectives. First, we describe the purpose of warnings and where warnings fit with other safety considerations, such as design and guarding. Next, we present a model that incorporates both communication and information-processing concepts, which is characteristic of theoretical orientations that have guided much of the warning research. The research and application issues have generally focused on two themes: design factors and non-design factors that influence warning effectiveness. Third, we review the progress and status of research and application, with an emphasis on identifying those factors that appear to be most important in determining warning effectiveness. Finally, we conclude with a discussion of some of the challenges and opportunities facing warning designers and researchers in the future.

This chapter reviews some of the basic research methodologies used to investigate warning effectiveness. Selected studies are used as examples to describe how specific methods are implemented. Although some results are discussed, the goal is to focus on the methods used to achieve the results. This chapter is organized based on the information processing stages of the Communication-Human Information Processing (C-HIP) framework (Wogalter, chap. 5, this volume). The stages and typical assessment methods include (a) attention switch and maintenance stages, using eye tracking, response time, and looking behavior; (b) comprehension/memory, using recall and recognition tests; (c) attitudes, beliefs, and motivations, using subjective and self-report measures. Issues including operational definitions , subjective measures, and validity/reliability in warning effectiveness studies are discussed.

The purpose of this experiment was to examine the effects of warning quality and human factors expert testimony on decision making in consumer product injury cases. Participants read summaries of consumer product accidents, where a no, poor or good warning was present. In two conditions, human factors (HF) expert testimony was included, giving an opinion on the quality of the product warnings. Participants allocated percentages of responsibility to the manufacturer, retailer, and consumer, as if they were jury members assigned to the cases. Results showed differences in allocations of responsibility among conditions. Manufacturers were allocated more responsibility when there was no warning on the product or when a poor warning was present and a HFexpert testified that a better warning could have been used. Allocations did not differ between poor and good warning conditions, possibly because participants viewing poor warnings lacked knowledge of the way a good warning would look. The results have implications for warning design, the use of HF expert witnesses, and jury decision making.

There has been relatively little warnings research directed at systematically examining the component features comprising existing warning signs as specified in standards (ANSI Z535) and guidelines (e.g., FMC, 1985 ; Westinghouse, 1981). This research examines several elemental features found in real-world warning signs to determine their individual as well as their combined effects on people's hazard perceptions. Various colors, signal words, shapes and configurations-both individuallyand in combination-comprisingexisting warning headers as well as newly developed constituents were evaluated in a series of rating and ranking tasks. The results conf"mned several existing published recommendations (e.g., the color red is perceived to connote more hazard than other solid colors), but also showed instances where people's perceptions differed from those assumed in design standards and guidelines. Some newly-developed header configurations (e.g., having a skull icon to the right of the signal world) show promise as alternatives for signaling hazardous conditions.