The effect of warning placement was investigated using a task-analytic approach to generate alternative warning locations. Within the context of a realistic task, 60 subjects used a consumer product that displayed a warning in one of four conditions. In two of the conditions the warnings were positioned so as to temporarily interfere with task performance. Dependent measures included attention to and behavioral compliance with the warning. The effect of warning placement was significant; the percentage of subjects who noticed the warning ranged from 0% to 93%, and the percentage who complied ranged from 0% to 53% across the four warning conditions. It was also found that warnings that temporarily interfered with task performance were significantly more effective than those that did not. The results are supportive of a task-analytic approach to warning design that pays particular attention to the cognitive aspects of task performance. The results also illustrate that, although alternative warning locations for a given product may satisfy commonly accepted placement criteria, they can differ dramatically in their effectiveness.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American National Standards Institute (ANSI). (1991a). ANSI Z535.2-Environmental and facility safety signs. New York: Author.
2.
American National Standards Institute (ANSI). (1991b). ANSI Z535. 4-Product safety signs and labels. New York: Author.
3.
Bower, G. H., Black, J. B., and Turner, T. J. (1979). Scripts in memory for text. Cognitive Psychology. 11, 177–220.
4.
Bozinoff, L. (1981). A script theoretic approach to information processing: An energy conservation application. In Advances in Consumer Research (Vol. IX, pp. 481–486). St. Louis, MO: Association for Consumer Research.
5.
Card, S. E., Moran, T. P., and Newell, A. (1983). The psychology of human-computer interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
6.
Chapanis, A. (1965). Words, words, words. Human Factors, 7, 1–17.
7.
Cunitz, R. J. (1981). Psychologically effective warnings. Hazard Prevention, 17(3), 5–7.
8.
Darzinskis, K. (1990, February). Readers' pulse: Product warnings. Professional Safety, p. 12.
9.
DeJoy, D. M. (1989). Consumer product warnings: Review and analysis of effectiveness research. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 33rd Annual Meeting (pp. 936–939). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
10.
Drury, C. G., Paramore, B., Van Cott, H. P., Grey, S. M., and Corlett, E. N. (1987). Task analysis. In G. Salvendy (Ed.), Handbook of human factors (pp. 370–401). New York: Wiley.
11.
FMC Corporation. (1985). Product safety sign and label system. Santa Clara, CA: Author.
12.
Frantz, J. P., Miller, J. M., and Lehto, M. R. (1991). Must the context be considered when applying generic safety symbols? A case study in flammable contact adhesives. Journal of Safety Research. 22, 147–161.
13.
Friedmann, K. (1988). The effect of adding symbols to written warning labels on user behavior and recall. Human Factors, 30, 507–515.
14.
Kern, R. P. (1985). Modeling users and their use of technical manuals. In T. M. Duffy and R. Waller (Eds.), Designing usable text. (pp. 341–375). Orlando, FL: Academic.
15.
Koenig, F., and Cunitz, R. J. (1989, January/March). Sparkling wines and warnings. Hazard Prevention, pp. 12–14.
16.
Laughery, K. R., and Brelsford, J. W. (1991). Receiver characteristics in safety communications. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 35th Annual Meeting (pp. 1068–1072). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
17.
Lehto, M. R. (1991). A proposed conceptual model of human behavior and its implications for the design of warnings. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 73, 595–611.
18.
Lehto, M. R. (1992). Designing warning signs and warning labels: Part II. Scientific basis for initial guidelines. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 10, 115–138.
19.
Lehto, M. R., and Clark, D. R. (1991). Warning signs and labels in the workplace. In A. Mital and W. Karwowski (Eds.). Workplace, equipment and tool design (pp. 303–344). New York: Elsevier.
20.
Lehto, M. R., and Miller, J. M. (1986). Warnings: Vol. I. Fundamentals, design, and evaluation methodologies. Ann Arbor, MI: Fuller Technical.
21.
McCarthy, R. L., Finnegan, J. P., Krumm-Scott, S., and McCarthy, G. E. (1984). Product information presentation, user behavior, and safety. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 28th Annual Meeting (pp. 81–85). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
22.
Miller, J. M., Frantz, J. P., and Rhoades, T. P. (1991). A model for developing and evaluating product information. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 35th Annual Meeting (pp. 1063–1067). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
23.
Miller, J. M., Lehto, M. R., and Frantz, J. P. (1990). Instructions and warnings: The annotated bibliography. Ann Arbor, MI: Fuller Technical.
24.
Moore, M. G. (1991, April). Product warning effectiveness: Perception vs. reality. Professional Safety, pp. 21–24.
25.
Niebel, B. W. (1988). Motion and time study. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
26.
Norman, D. A. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.
27.
Otsubo, S. M. (1988). Abehavioral study of warning labels for consumer products: Perceived danger and use of pictographs. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 32nd Annual Meeting (pp. 536–540). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
28.
Price, J. (1984). How to write a computer manual. Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin/Cummins.
29.
Ramsey, J. D. (1989). An ergonomic model for warning assessment. In A. Mital (Ed.), Advances in industrial ergonomics and safety (Vol. I, pp. 731–735). London: Taylor & Francis.
30.
Rasmussen, J. (1986). Information processing and human-machine interaction: An approach to cognitive engineering. New York: North-Holland.
31.
Rhoades, T. P., Frantz, J. P., and Miller, J. M. (1990). Emerging methodologies for the assessment of safety-related product communications. In Proceedings of the Human Fators Society 34th Annual Meeting (pp. 998–1002). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
32.
Robinson, G. H. (1991). Partial attention in warning failure: Observations from accidents. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 35th Annual Meeting (pp. 603–605). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
33.
Schank, R., and Abelson, R. (1976). Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding. Hillsdale, Erlbaum.
34.
Smillie, R. J. (1985). Design strategies for job performance aids. In T. M. Duffy and R. Waller (Eds.), Designing usable text (pp. 213–243). New York: Academic.
35.
Strawbridge, J. A. (1986). The influence of position, highlighting, and imbedding on warning effectiveness. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 30th Annual Meeting (pp. 716-–720). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
Wingfield, A., and Byrnes, D. L. (1981). The psychology of human memoryNew York: Academic.
38.
Wogalter, M. S., Godfrey, S. S., Fontenelle, G. A., Desaulniers, D. R., Rothstein, P. R., and Laughery, K. R. (1987). Effectiveness of warnings. Human Factors29, 599–612.
39.
Wright, P. (1980). Usability: The criterion for designing written information. In P. A. Kolers, M. E. Wrolstad, and H. Bouma (Eds.). Processing of visible language (Vol. 2, pp. 183–205). New York: Plenum.
