Behavioral Effectiveness of Warnings

Abstract

A paradigm was developed to examine the effectiveness of warnings in a laboratory task. A task was presented to subjects as one examining how people perform a basic chemistry demonstration. Experiment 1 examined the effects of two locations of the warning (before and after instructions) and two different signal word presentations (WARNING and Note). An additional condition with no warning or signal word served as a control. No effects were found on time or accuracy. However, compliance (use of mask and gloves) was affected by the inclusion of the warning as well as by its location. Greatest compliance occurred when the warning was placed prior to the instructions. Experiment 2 replicated the effect of location. The addition of a printed statement placed before the instructions (with warning at the end) to read through the instructions before beginning produced intermediate compliance that was not significantly different from the warning beginning and end conditions.Observation revealed that when the warning message was at the end of the instructions subjects complied only when they saw the warning message before starting the task. These results indicate that i f warnings are placed in front of instructions the consumer is more likely to read and comply.

The Effectiveness of Warning Labels for Consumers: A Meta-Analytic Investigation into Their Underlying Process and Contingencies

“…Bansal-Travers et al 2011, Borland (1997), Braun and Silver (1995), Cvetkovich and Earle (1995), Dingus, Wreggit, and Hathaway (1993), Wogalter et al (1987) Text salience Conspicuous print, font color, font size, text direction, embeddedness in instruction text, highlighting text, white space Adams and Edworthy (1995), Barlow and Wogalter (1993), Frantz (1992), Hammond et al (2007), Malouff et al (1993), Strawbridge (1986a, b), Wogalter, Fontenelle, and Laughery (1985) Shape salience Conspicuousness of label configuration, shape of the label, package design, border width Adams and Edworthy (1995), Bhalla and Lastovicka (1984), Cvetkovich and Earle (1995), Barlow and Wogalter (1993), Goldberg et al (1999) , Strawbridge (1986a,b), Wogalter, Allison, and McKenna (1989) Picture Text versus picture, pictorial icons, visual information factor, graphic images Bansal-Travers et al 2011, Hassan et al (2007), Kees et al (2006Kees et al ( , 2010, Peters et al (2007), Sabbane, Lowrey, and Chebat (2009), Young and Wogalter (1990) subject filled out a questionnaire on smoking habits. Consequently, we propose the following: Laughery and Wogalter (2014) emphasize that understanding a warning does not necessarily ensure that it will be recalled at the proper time.…”

“…Appendix: Studies Included in the Meta-Analysis • Adams and Edworthy (1995) • Azagba and Sharaf (2013) • Bansal-Travers et al 2011• Barlow and Wogalter (1993) • Bhalla and Lastovicka (1984) • Borland (1997) • Braun and Silver (1995) • Braun, Silver, and Stock (1992 • Godfrey, Rothstein, and Laughery (1985) • Goldberg et al (1999) • Goldhaber and DeTurck (1988) • Goldhaber and DeTurck (1989) • Goodall and Appiah (2008) • Hammond et al (2004 Wogalter, Allison, and McKenna (1989) • Wogalter, Fontenelle, and Laughery (1985) • Wogalter, Jarrard, and Simpson (1994) • Wogalter, Kalsher, and Racicot (1992) • Wogalter, Kalsher, and Racicot (1993) • Wogalter et al (1987) • Young and Wogalter (1990) • Zhao et al (2014)…”

Meta-Analyses of the Effectiveness of Warning Labels

“…Researchers have used a variety of measures to assess the effectiveness of warning labels in conveying hazard information to consumers. Common examples of the measures include noticeability (Frantz and Rhoades 1993), likelihood of reading (Magurno and Wogalter 1994), comprehension (Young and Wogalter 1990), recall (Lehto and Miller 1988), perceived hazard (Friedmann 1988; Otsubo 1988b), and behavioral intentions (Wogalter, Fontenelle, and Laughery 1985). In this research, we identify the five dimensions of effectiveness that represent the sequential processing of information that consumers engage in when they are exposed to warnings (McGuire 1980; Wogalter and Laughery 1996; Wogalter and Sojourner 1999).…”

Perceptions of Consumer Products: Hazardousness and Warning Expectations

“…First, the consumer may not see the warnings. For example, Wogalter, Fontenelle, & Laughery (1985) have shown that warnings located following a set of instructions may not be seen. A second possible reason is that consumers may not comprehend warnings.…”