Comprehending Product Warning Information: Age-Related Effects and the Roles of Memory,Inferencing,and Knowledge

Abstract

Two experiments were conducted to determine if age affects comprehension for explicit and implied warning information and, if so, to reveal the nature of such effects. Experiment 1 measured younger (18-23 years) and older (65-75 years) adults' comprehension for real-world warnings via a verification test presented immediately after reading the warnings or after a delay. In Experiment 2, younger (18-22 years) and older (64-76 years) participants also read fabricated warnings that were inconsistent with real-world knowledge. In both experiments, older adults frequently failed to infer the correct hazard and safety information. The older adults also had trouble understanding warning information even when it was explicitly stated (when no inferences were required), especially when memory demands were high and product-specific knowledge could not be used. That many of the older adults did not understand commonly used product warnings indicates that the wording on many household products is not conducive to being understood by everyone who uses them. Actual or potential applications of this research include the recommendation that designers of product labels, warnings, and instructions should consider minimizing memory load and maximizing opportunities for knowledge application when designing consumer warnings.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Brown, J. I. , Fishco, V. V. , & Hanna, G. (1993). Nelson-Denny Reading Test. Chicago: Riverside.

Graesser, A. C. , & Bertus, E. L. (1998). The construction of causal inferences while reading expository texts on science and technology. Scientific Studies of Reading, 2, 247-269.

Hancock, H. E. , Fisk, A. D. , & Rogers, W. A. (2001). Comprehension of explicit and implied warning information in younger and older adults. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46th Annual Meeting (pp. 1474-1478). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.

Hancock, H. E. , Rogers, W. A. , & Fisk, A. D. (2001). An evaluation of warning habits and beliefs across the adult life span. Human Factors, 43, 343-354.

Light, L. L. , Zelinski, E. M. , & Moore, M. (1982). Adult age differences in reasoning from new information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 8, 435-447.

Meyer, B. J. F. , Marsiske, M. , & Willis, S. L. (1993). Text processing variables predict the readability of everyday documents by older adults. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 234-249.

Miller, E. N. , Fujioka, T. A. , Chapman, L. J. , & Chapman, J. P. (1995). Psychometrically matched tasks for assessment of hemispheric asymmetries of function. Brain and Cognition, 28, 1-13.

Reder, L. M. , Wible, C. , & Martin, C. (1986). Differential memory changes with age: Exact retrieval versus plausible inference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 12, 72-81.

See, J. E. , Warm, J. S. , Dember, W. N. , & Howe, S. R. (1997). Vigilance and signal detection theory: An empirical evaluation of five measures of response bias. Human Factors, 39, 14-29.

10.

Sharkey, A. J. , & Sharkey, N. E. (1992). Weak contextual constraints in text and word priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 543-572.

11.

Shipley, W. C. (1940). A self-administering scale for measuring intellectual impairment and deterioration. Journal of Psychology, 9, 371-377.

12.

Smith, A. D. (1975). Aging and interference with memory. Journal of Gerontology, 30, 319-325.

13.

Wechsler, D. (1981). The Digit Symbol Substitution Test: Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale - Revised. New York: Psychological Corp./Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

14.

Wechsler, D. (1997). Wechsler Memory Scale III (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.