The Effects of Product, Signal Word, and Color on Warning Labels: Differences in Perceived Hazard

2002 ◽  
Vol 46 (6) ◽  
pp. 735-739
Author(s):  
N. Clayton Silver ◽  
Kelly L. Drake ◽  
Zahra B. Niaghi ◽  
Aubrey C. Brim ◽  
Otto Pedraza
Keyword(s):  
Significant Interaction ◽  
Consumer Products ◽  
Product Type ◽  
Warning Labels ◽  
Dark Background ◽  
Muriatic Acid ◽  
Hazard Level ◽  
Hazard Warning

Signal words, such as DANGER, WARNING, and CAUTION are often used on consumer products to connote various levels of hazard. Each of these signal words is usually printed in a color (e.g., white on a dark background) in order to potentially increase saliency or aesthetics. Hence, there is a potentially significant interaction of signal word, color, and product type on perceived hazard. Warning labels for muriatic acid, Xtra-Clean All Purpose Cleaner, and Crayola Crayons were factorially combined with signal word (DEADLY, DANGER, WARNING, CAUTION, and NOTE) and color of signal word (orange, blue, red, black) for a total of 60 conditions. A sample of 124 undergraduates rated each product warning on understandability, likelihood of compliance, carefulness, and attention-gettingness. Results indicated that muriatic acid had significantly higher hazard ratings than either the cleaner or crayons. Black connoted the highest level of hazard followed by blue, red, and orange. Furthermore, the order of perceived hazard from highest to lowest for signal word was DEADLY, DANGER, WARNING, CAUTION, and NOTE. Moreover, there appears to be an averaging effect in which muriatic acid with the signal word NOTE printed in orange produced the same connoted hazard level as the package of crayons with the signal word CAUTION printed in red. Implications for warning design are discussed.

Trends in Federally Mandated Warning Labels for Consumer Products

2001 ◽  
Vol 45 (11) ◽  
pp. 838-842 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick J. Diedrich ◽  
Christine T. Wood ◽  
Thomas J. Ayres
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Safety Information ◽  
The United States ◽  
Consumer Products ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Warning Labels ◽  
Labeling Requirements ◽  
Hazard Warning

Consumer products currently sold in the United States often come with extensive safety information, but the presentation of large amounts of such material was not always the case. We reviewed federally mandated hazard labeling as it evolved during the 20th century by documenting changes in labeling requirements for home-use products prescribed by federal statutes. Our review indicated that during the course of the 20th century, there was a dramatic change in the presence, prevalence and specificity of hazard warning requirements. In the early years, Congress concentrated on truth in labeling of contents and quality. This labeling identified hazardous agents in some products. However, as the century progressed, Congress gradually added requirements that could include descriptions of the mechanisms, consequences, and means for avoidance of such hazards. Moreover, the 1960's and especially the 1970's brought a dramatic expansion in the number and types of products required to bear hazard labels.

Allocation of Responsibility for Product Safety

1995 ◽  
Vol 39 (8) ◽  
pp. 435-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth R. Laughery ◽  
David R. Lovvoll ◽  
Michael S. Wogalter
Keyword(s):  
Significant Interaction ◽  
User Study ◽  
Consumer Products ◽  
Product Safety ◽  
The Other ◽  
Product Use ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
High Hazard ◽  
The Mean

Three studies were carried out to explore how people allocate responsibility for safety during product use. In Study 1 29 consumer products were named and subjects apportioned safety responsibility to the manufacturer, the retailer, the user, and a potentially relevant organization not in the stream of commerce (e.g., FDA, CPSC, Underwriters Laboratories). The mean percent responsibility allocated to these four alternatives was 43%, 9%, 27% and 21% respectively. A significant interaction indicated that the allocation varied across products. In Study 2 safety responsibility for the same products was allocated to the manufacturer, retailer and user, but the “outside” organization was omitted. The mean percent allocated was 51%, 20% and 30% respectively. In this study, additional questions assessed various perceptions of the products and the subject's familiarity with the products. The results indicated that responsibility allocation was a function of perception of product hazardousness; the more hazardous a product is perceived to be, the more responsibility is allocated to the user. Study 3 investigated some of the attributes of high hazard products which are associated with various allocations of product safety. For high hazard products with open and obvious risks (chain saws, cutting torches), more responsibility was allocated to consumers as opposed to manufacturers. On the other hand, for those high hazard products with “hidden” risks (pesticides, antifreeze), manufacturers were typically allocated a much higher degree of responsibility.

Human Factors Design Criteria for Safe Use of Consumer Products

1983 ◽  
Vol 27 (9) ◽  
pp. 811-815 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph P. Ryan
Keyword(s):  
Human Factors ◽  
Product Design ◽  
Consumer Products ◽  
Design Criteria ◽  
Great Contribution ◽  
Safe Product ◽  
Risk Acceptance ◽  
Traditional Approaches ◽  
Reasonable Use ◽  
Hazard Warning

The increasing number of suits filed each year in courts arising from personal injuries while using consumer products indicates safety in design needs immediate evaluation. Human Factors engineers can make a great contribution in this area, especially by working more closely with traditional approaches to product design. Many engineers who are responsible for design, testing, and quality control have not had the benefit of training in ergonomics and psychology. As a result, many products sold in the marketplace today reflect too-high a risk acceptance for the ordinary consumer. This paper describes criteria for safe design of consumer products based on foreseeable and reasonable use of products. Sources of product standards relating to performance and safety are presented. Safe product design criteria based on risk, reliability, foreseeability, psychological considerations, and hazard warning are presented.

A Behavioral Study of Warning Labels for Consumer Products: Perceived Danger and Use of Pictographs

1988 ◽  
Vol 32 (9) ◽  
pp. 536-540 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shirley M. Otsubo
Keyword(s):  
Additional Data ◽  
Consumer Products ◽  
Warning Label ◽  
Warning Labels ◽  
Circular Saw ◽  
Warning Message ◽  
Precautionary Action ◽  
Perceived Danger ◽  
Four Levels ◽  
High Level

This study focused on the effectiveness of warning labels placed on consumer products differing in perceived “danger” or “hazard.” A 2×4 between-subject design (N=131) was performed, incorporating two levels of product danger (circular saw=high level of danger; jigsaw=low level of danger) and four levels of warning label (words only, pictograph only, words+pictograph, and no warning). Effectiveness was investigated by studying the behavior of product users to determine who noticed, read, complied and recalled the warning message. Overall results indicated that subjects noticed, read and complied with warnings placed on the product perceived to be more dangerous than on the product perceived to be less dangerous. Additional data suggest that people more familiar with use of the product will tend to read, comply and recall the warning less than those less familiar. Also people more confident with the use of the product will tend to read and comply less than those less confident. Type of warning label showed no effect. However, in all conditions with a warning label, an average of 25.5% complied with the warning (range 12.5 – 50%), and without a warning label no one took precautionary action consistent with the warning message. The findings support the contention that the use of conspicuously designed and placed warning labels on products will influence people to behave cautiously.

The Interaction of Signal Word and Color on Warning Labels: Differences in Perceived Hazard

1994 ◽  
Vol 38 (14) ◽  
pp. 831-835 ◽  
Author(s):  
Curt C. Braun ◽  
Lori Sansing ◽  
N. Clayton Silver
Keyword(s):  
Warning Labels ◽  
Word Group ◽  
High Hazard ◽  
Hazard Level ◽  
Color Combinations ◽  
Moderate Hazard

Previous research has examined the connoted hazard of various colors and signal words separately. The purpose of the present research was to examine the interaction of signal words and colors. A sample of 30 undergraduates rated the perceived hazard of 105 signal word/color combinations printed in specific hazard colors. of the colors used, red conveyed the highest level of perceived hazard followed by orange, black, green, and blue. There were significant differences among the signal words which were grouped into three different hazard level categories. High hazard words conveyed significantly more hazard than moderate and low hazard words. Likewise, moderate hazard words conveyed significantly more hazard than low hazard word group. More importantly, however, it was noted that a signal word such as DEADLY connoted less hazard when printed in green than red ink. Implications for warning design are discussed.

Availability of Owner's Manuals for ‘Second-Hand’ Consumer Products

1994 ◽  
Vol 38 (8) ◽  
pp. 447-450
Author(s):  
Michael S. Wogalter ◽  
Robin C. Baneth
Keyword(s):  
Safety Information ◽  
Search Time ◽  
Consumer Products ◽  
Shopping Center ◽  
Lawn Mower ◽  
Instruction Sheet ◽  
First Sale ◽  
Hazard Level ◽  
Computer Power

This research concerns the availability of owner's manuals for second-hand (used or resold) consumer products. One-hundred people were approached in a shopping center mall and asked various consumer-oriented questions including: (a) whether they have ever purchased new and/or used 20 common consumer products (e.g., car, computer, power lawn mower, bicycle, etc.), and if so, whether those products came with an owner's manual or an instruction sheet when purchased; (b) whether they had personally sold any of the products, and if so, whether they transferred the owner's manual to the new owner; and (c) how much they would pay for the owner's manuals for each product assuming they had to purchase it separately. Also, they gave 9–point ratings on the products' familiarity, hazard level, and difficulty of use. The survey included several other questions including asking participants how they store their manuals, and for them to estimate the search time to find them. The findings show that while owner's manuals for some used-products are frequently transferred to new owners, others are not. In the latter cases, lack of owner's manual availability means that certain kinds of important safety information may not reach consumers — despite consumers wanting the information and the fact that manufacturers' included it with the product at its first sale. The results also indicate that people want access to owner's manuals for second-hand product. Participants agreed that including the owner's manual would help the sale of used products and that they were willing to pay extra for one (particularly for difficult-to-use products). These results suggest that manufacturers ought to address ways that would make it more likely that consumers retain the owner's manual and transfer it to subsequent owners at later resale, and provide consumers with convenient ways that they can request a replacement copy should the original manual become inaccessible.

Effects of Warning Explicitness on Product Perceptions

1989 ◽  
Vol 33 (6) ◽  
pp. 431-435 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth R. Laughery ◽  
Julie A. Stanush
Keyword(s):  
Safety Information ◽  
Consumer Products ◽  
Clear Indication ◽  
Purchasing Decisions ◽  
Warning Labels ◽  
Common Assumption ◽  
Item Questionnaire ◽  
Product Familiarity

A common assumption of manufacturers is that explicit warning labels will deter consumers from purchasing products. This study explored people's reactions to explicit and nonexplicit warning labels, where explicitness refers to how specifically the potential injury consequences were described. 108 subjects completed a 12-item questionnaire for each of nine familiar consumer products. The questions covered the severity of potential injury, product familiarity, product hazards and dangerousness, manufacturer's concerns, and potential purchasing decisions. Results suggest that products are perceived as more dangerous and related injuries as more severe when warnings are explicit. Also, with explicit warnings subjects report that they better understand the hazards, that they are being provided with all the necessary safety information, and that manufacturers are more concerned about safety. There was no clear indication that more explicit warnings either deter people from purchasing a product or increase the likelihood of a purchase.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document