Warnings and Risk Taking in the Allocation of Responsibility for Consumer Product Safety

Meingast, Melissa E.; Laughery, Kenneth R.; Laughery, Brenda R.; Lovvoll, David R.

doi:10.1177/154193129904300901

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…This responsibility is especially salient when there are hidden risks or there is an absence of warning labels (e.g., Laughery, Lovvoll, & Wogalter, 1995;Meingast, Laughery, Laughery, & Lovvoll, 1999). Prescription medication has been traditionally held as possessing "hidden" risks, or those risks associated with use, which are not readily apparent to the user (Meingast, et al, 1999). In such cases the majority of responsibility is Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46th Annual Meeting --2002 PROCEEDINGS of the HUMAN FACTORS AND ERGONOMICS SOCIETY 46th ANNUAL MEETING --2002 allocated to the manufacturer, and less to the consumer (Laughery, et al, 1995;Laughery, 1997;Kalsher, et al, 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Allocation of Responsibility for Medication Errors

Paige

2002

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was designed to assess perceptions of responsibility for consumer safety while using prescription medication. Twenty-five university students were presented with four scenarios depicting an adverse outcome due to negligence involving the administration of a prescription medication. Responsibility could be assigned to the physician, the pharmacist, or the consumer (patient). Scenarios were framed either with no information regarding who committed the error, a physician error, or a patient error. The consumer was given significantly more responsibility overall, mean = 54.59 percent for consumer, compared to 34.48 percent for physician. The percent responsibility allocated to the pharmacist was not a focus of this study as its mean allocation was small, mean = 10.92, and did not vary with experimental manipulations. The shift in responsibility assigned to the consumer when the scenario highlighted consumer error was significantly greater than the corresponding shift in responsibility assigned to the physician in the physician condition.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Allocation of Responsibility for Medication Errors

Paige

2002

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ultimately, however, safe use and storage of potentially dangerous household products such as liquid laundry capsules rely not just on safety engineering by industry but also on decisions and behaviors by users [ 4 , 5 ]. Will they consistently and reliably close containers to keep children safe?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing closure compliance and ease of use for consumer product packs designed to reduce access to children

Richmond,

Schwebel,

Leung

et al. 2024

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Child impeding packs are difficult for children to open so protect them from unintended access to hazardous contents inside the pack. However, if packs are difficult for adults to open, in normal usage scenarios, this may result in a higher occurrence of packs being left open. This research explores differences in ease of usage and closure compliance between two types of child impeding packs of liquid laundry detergent capsules. The two packs, “Pinch & Lift” and “Press & Lift”, had different opening and closing mechanisms. “Press & Lift” also included an audible “click” signal to confirm complete closure to the user. The research was performed across two studies. In both studies, the packs were used in participants’ homes according to their usual storage and usage practices as replacements to their current liquid laundry detergent capsule pack. All participants had small children living with them in their household. In Study 1, self-reported closure and ease of use data was collected from 99 adult participants in Germany. They used each package in their home for 10 days. Study 2 extended Study 1 by measuring closure rates with an objective assessment using in pack sensors for a 10-day period for each pack. Self-reported closure and ease of use data were also collected. Study 2 was conducted with 87 participants in the United Kingdom. Results across both studies showed “Press & Lift” with the audible “Click” close signal to be rated by participants to be significantly easier to open and close and have a higher self-reported closure rate than “Pinch & Lift”. In addition, Study 2 results demonstrated higher closure rates using “Press & Lift” based on the sensor-measured closure compliance. Together, the results suggest transition to a pack with a mechanism that is child impeding and easier for an adult to use with an audible closure signal, like the “Press & Lift” system, has potential to reduce child access to a capsule from a pack by reducing the likelihood of the pack being left open by the adult user. Ultimately, such packs could protect children from potential poisoning injury across a range of consumer products.

show abstract

Allocation of Pain and Suffering Awards for Consumer Product Accidents: Effects of Level of Economic Damages

Laughery

Meingast

et al. 2000

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A study was carried out to explore the effects of the level of economic damage awards on the amount of pain and suffering awards in a product liability litigation context. Two separate accident scenarios were presented to participants who were instructed to consider themselves in the role of jurors. One scenario involved a vehicle accident resulting in permanent quadriplegia and the other described a work place incident where an employee received chemical burns on 65% of his body. Two levels of economic damages were manipulated for each scenario as a between-participants variable. Following the presentation of each scenario, including the economic damages award, participants were asked to make a pain and suffering award. There were no constraints on the size of the awards. Results indicated significant differences in pain and suffering allocations for the two scenarios (means in dollars were: quad = 2.3 million, burn = 1.4 million). While mean pain and suffering awards were higher for the condition of higher economic damage awards (2.0 million) than for lower economic damage awards (1.5 million), the difference was not statistically significant. Substantial variance in the pain and suffering awards was also found, which poses interesting challenges to juries in reaching agreement on such awards.

show abstract

Warnings and Risk Taking in the Allocation of Responsibility for Consumer Product Safety

Cited by 3 publications

References 4 publications

Allocation of Responsibility for Medication Errors

Allocation of Responsibility for Medication Errors

Comparing closure compliance and ease of use for consumer product packs designed to reduce access to children

Allocation of Pain and Suffering Awards for Consumer Product Accidents: Effects of Level of Economic Damages

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About