Ratings checklist for warnings: a prototype tool to aid experts in the adequacy evaluation of proposed or existing warnings

Abstract

In the field of forensic human factors, experts are often called upon to assess and evaluate the adequacy of new or existing products' warnings or warnings systems. The usual goal of this evaluation is to arrive at a simple binary decision regarding the warning in question (i.e., does it "pass/fail", or is it "adequate/inadequate"). However, such a warning assessment process may in fact be quite complex and multidimensional in its execution. The existing warnings research literature has identified a fairly large number of warnings features or factors likely to have an impact on a given warning's effectiveness or adequacy. The tool addressed in this article is intended for use by a warnings expert (as opposed to one less knowledgeable and informed about complex warnings issues), and can serve as a reminder checklist to help ensure that the expert has taken into consideration the most relevant features or factors during such a warnings adequacy assessment.

The new normal of web camera theft on campus during COVID-19 and the impact of anti-theft signage

“…1 ). A substantial amount of scientific work has been conducted on how to design messages, especially in non-criminal contexts such as hazard control (Laughery & Page-Smith, 2006 ; Lenorovitz et al, 2012 ; Riley, 2006 ; Wogalter & Mayhorn, 2008 ; Wogalter et al, 2002 ). However, a small but growing body of literature has emerged connecting good message design to the prevention of crime (Prichard et al, 2021 ).…”

“…However, a small but growing body of literature has emerged connecting good message design to the prevention of crime (Prichard et al, 2021 ). Similar to the criteria compiled by Lenorovitz et al ( 2012 ), the signage used was clear in its anti-theft message (i.e. “Help Prevent Campus Theft), complete in its coverage of theft concerns (i.e.…”

Effects of Automated Messages on Internet Users Attempting to Access “Barely Legal” Pornography

“…Compliance has been found to increase when messages impart clear and concise information about hazards and the behavior needed to avoid them (Laughery & Smith, 2006;Lenorovitz, Leonard & Karnes, 2012); are believable (Riley, 2006) and come from a credible source (Wogalter & Mayhorn, 2008); and attract and maintain the attention of viewers through the use of signal words, such as 'warning' (Wogalter, Jarrard, & Simpson, 1992), alert icons or symbols, like '!' (Ng & Chan, 2009;Wogalter, Conzola & Smith-Jackson, 2002) and colors (Leonard, 1999;Silic & Cyr, 2016).…”

Current Issues in Warnings

“…The authors presented a paper at the most recent IEA Congress proposing a prototype warnings adequacy checklist tool that could be used by HFE Forensic professionals (i.e., warnings experts). The intent of this tool was to help such experts organize and document the bases for their opinions about the warnings in any given case (Lenorovitz, Leonard, & Karnes, 2012). In doing so, the authors identified a set of 15 features or factors of warnings adequacy drawn from warnings research published in the HFE literature over the past 30-40 years.…”

“…In each of these cases, the adequacy evaluation checklist provided the warnings expert with a useful framework within which to develop an opinion and to discuss the adequacy (or lack thereof) of the various items of precautionary information that were (or should have been) provided. In a recent paper Lenorovitz, Leonard, and Karnes (2012) discussed literature pertaining to characteristics of warnings that were relevant to the usefulness of those warnings. In practice, two of the important features of warnings are the conspicuity and placement of the warnings.…”