The effect of a personalized technology-based warning on compliance was assessed using an immersive virtual environment (IVE). Sixty university students performed an end-of-day routine security check in the IVE. Participants were asked to search for and activate safety-related devices, which involved entering several rooms. Just prior to abandoning the first room, participants were incidentally exposed to a posted warning (mandatory to disconnect the music generator) consisting of either a personal warning (i.e., a speech message with the participant’s first name) or an impersonal warning (i.e., a auditory beep signal). Compliance was determined by observing whether or not the participants pressed the button-switch as directed by the warning. Results reveal that compliance rate was significantly greater when the warning was personalized. No significant gender differences were found. Implications of these results are discussed in terms of the benefits of effective warnings.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarlowT.WogalterM. S. (1993). Alcoholic beverage warnings in magazine and television advertisements. Journal of Consumer Research, 20, 147-156.
2.
CohenH. H.CohenJ.MendatC. C.WogalterM. S. (2006). Warning channel: Modality and media. In WogalterM. S. (Ed.), Handbook of warnings (pp. 123-134), Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
3.
ConzolaV. C.WogalterM. S. (1999). Using voice and print directives and warnings to supplement product manual instructions. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 23, 549-556.
4.
DuarteE.RebeloF.TelesJ.WogalterM. S. (2010). Behavioral compliance in virtual reality: Effects of warning type. In KaberD. B.BoyG. (Eds.), Advances in Cognitive Ergonomics. (pp. 812-821). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
5.
DuarteE.RebeloF.WogalterM. S. (2010). Virtual reality and its potential for evaluating warning compliance. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 20, 526-537.
6.
EdworthyJ.HellierE. (2006). Complex nonverbal auditory signals and speech warnings. In WogalterM. S. (Ed.), Handbook of warnings (pp. 199-220), Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
7.
GamberiniL.CottoneP.SpagnolliA.VarottoD.MantovaniG. (2003). Responding to a fire emergency in a virtual environment: Different patterns of action for different situations. Ergonomics, 46, 842-858.
8.
GloverB. L.WogalterM. S. (1997). Using a computer simulated world to study behavioral compliance with warnings: Effects of salience and gender, Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 41st Annual Meeting (pp. 1283-1287). Santa Monica: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
9.
HaasE.EdworthyJ. (2006). An introduction to auditory warnings and alarms. In WogalterM. S. (Ed.), Handbook of warnings (pp. 189-198), Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
10.
International Organization for Standardization. (2002). Graphical Symbols - Safety Colors and Safety Signs. Part 1: Design Principles for Safety Signs in Workplaces and Public Areas, ISO 3864-1. Geneve, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization.
11.
MachadoS.DuarteE.TelesJ.ReisL.RebeloF. (2012). Selection of a voice for a speech signal for personalized warnings: The effect of speaker’s gender and voice pitch. Work, 41, 3592-3598.
12.
MorayN. (1969). Attention: Selective processes in vision and hearing. London: Hutchinson Educational.
13.
Smith-JacksonT. L. (2006). Receiver characteristics. In WogalterM. S. (Ed.), Handbook of warnings (pp. 335-344), Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
14.
TangC.-H.WuW.-T.LinC.-Y. (2009). Using virtual reality to determine how emergency signs facilitate way-finding. Applied Ergonomics, 40, 722-730.
15.
TeixeiraL.RebeloF.FilgueirasE. (2010). Human interaction data acquisition software for virtual reality: A user-centered design approach. In KaberD. B.BoyG. (Eds.), Advances in Cognitive Ergonomics (pp. 793-801). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
16.
VredenburghA. G.CohenH. H. (1993). Compliance with warnings in high risk recreational activities. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 37th Annual Meeting (pp. 945-949). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.
17.
WogalterM. S.ConzolaV. C. (2002). Using technology to facilitate the design and delivery of warnings. International Journal of Systems Science, 33, 461-466.
18.
WogalterM. S.KalsherM. J.RacicotB. M. (1993). Behavioral compliance with warnings: Effects of voice, context, and location. Safety Science, 16, 637-654.
19.
WogalterM. S.MayhornC. B. (2005). Providing cognitive support with technology-based warning systems. Ergonomics, 48, 522-533.
20.
WogalterM. S.MayhornC. B. (2006). The future of risk communication: Technology-based warning systems. In WogalterM. S. (Ed.), Handbook of warnings (pp. 783-793), Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
21.
WogalterM. S.RacicotB. M.KalsherM. J.SimpsonS. N. (1994). Personalization of warning signs: The role of perceived relevance on behavioral compliance. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 14, 233-242.
22.
WogalterM. S.YoungS. L. (1991). Behavioural compliance to voice and print warnings. Ergonomics, 34, 79-89.
23.
YoungS. L.MartinE. G.WogalterM. S. (1989). Gender differences in consumer product hazard perceptions. In Proceedings of Interface89 (pp. 73-79). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.
