ANSI Z535 Signal Words and the Ability to Infer Hazard and Consequence Information - 1992 versus 2004

Abstract

This study examined the influence of signal word on the interpretation of a product safety label in 1992 and 2004. It also examined people's ability to infer consequences from a label that did not explicitly state hazard or consequence information. Participants were shown a label with the signal word DANGER, WARNING, or CAUTION, or with no signal word and asked a series of questions regarding willingness to engage in certain activities with the product, perceived degree of hazard associated with engaging in these activities, perceived degree of hazard associated with not heeding the label, and perceived consequences of not heeding the label. Participants were able to infer the type of hazard and other consequence information that was not explicitly stated. Presence or type of signal word did not influence perceived hazardousness or perceived consequences and with one exception did not influence willingness to engage in certain activities. With one minor exception, there were no differences in responses between 1992 and 2004. In a separate analysis, hazard ratings, overall, were lower for signal words when presented second than when presented first.

When Open and Obvious is Neither: The Importance of Context in Human Factors Forensics

“…In particular, they contained the signal work 'Caution', suggesting that the hazard was not serious (although Frantz et al (2005) suggest that signal words may not be meaningful anyway in situations where hazard severity can be inferred). Also, they were in English, which the worker did not speak.…”