Injury Severity and Likelihood in Warnings

Abstract

Two experiments examined the influence of injury likelihood and severity in warnings on product hazard perceptions (Experiment 1) and behavioral compliance (Experiment 2). In Experiment 1, participants were given a set of front panel labels for 10 household consumer products. Warnings on the labels were constructed by manipulating the likelihood (low vs. high) and severity (low vs. high) of injury. Labels lacking a warning served as controls. Participants rated the product labels under the guise of a marketing study in which most of the questions concerned product familiarity, cost, and label attractiveness. Only one question was of interest which probed the level of hazard posed by the products. The results showed that (1) the presence of a warning increased the products' judged level of hazard, (2) products with high severity warnings were viewed to be more hazardous than products with low severity warnings, and (3) likelihood of injury in the warnings had no influence on hazard perceptions.

Experiment 2 used a chemistry laboratory demonstration task to test the effects of injury likelihood and severity in a warning on compliance behavior (i.e., wearing gloves as directed by the warning). Greater compliance was shown when warned of a more severe injury, but only when the injury was of lower likelihood.

In general, both experiments showed that injury severity influences warning effectiveness to a greater extent than injury likelihood. The results suggest that to inform people of a hazard and to motivate them to comply with a directed behavior, product warnings should communicate the severity of consequences.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Brems

D. J.

(1986). Risk Perception for Common Consumer Products. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Rice University, Houston, Texas.

Godfrey

S. S.

Allender

Laughery

K. R.

Smith

V. L.

(1983). Warning messages: Will the consumer bother to look? In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 27th Annual Meeting (pp. 950–954). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.

Martin

E. G.

Wogalter

M. S.

(1989). Risk perception and precautionary intent for common consumer products. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Human Factors Society Meeting (pp. 931–935).

Santa Monica: Human Factors Society. Slovic

Fischhoff

Lichtenstein

(1979). Rating the risks. Environment, 21, 14–39.

Slovic

Fischhoff

Lichtenstein

(1980). Facts and fears: Understanding perceived risk. In Schwing

R. C.

Albers

W. A.

Jr. (Eds.), Societal Risk Assessment (pp. 181–216). New York: Plenum Press.

Wogalter

M. S.

Brelsford

J. W.

Desaulniers

D. R.

Laughery

K. R.

(1990). Consumer product warnings: The role of hazard perception. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Wogalter

M. S.

Allison

S. T.

McKenna

N. A.

(1989). The effects of cost and social influence on warning compliance. Human Factors, 31, 133–140.

Wogalter

M. S.

Desaulniers

D. R.

Brelsford

J. W.

(1986). Perceptions of consumer product hazards: Implications for the need to warn. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Human Factors Society Meeting (pp. 1197–1201). Santa Monica: Human Factors Society.

Wogalter

M. S.

Desaulniers

D. R.

Brelsford

J. W.

(1987a). Consumer products: How are the hazards perceived? In Proceedings of the 31st Annual Human Factors Society Meeting (pp. 615–619). Santa Monica: Human Factors Society.

10.

Wogalter

M. S.

Godfrey

S. S.

Fontenelle

G. A.

Desaulniers

D. R.

Rothstein

Laughery

K. R.

(1987b). Effectiveness of warnings. Human Factors, 29, 599–612.

11.

Young

S. L.

Brelsford

J. W.

Wogalter

M. S.

(1990). Judgments of hazard, risk, and danger: Do they differ? In Proceedings of the 34th Annual Human Factors Society Meeting. Santa Monica: Human Factors Society.