Literature DB >> 12164506

Research-based guidelines for warning design and evaluation.

Michael S Wogalter1, Vincent C Conzola, Tonya L Smith-Jackson.   

Abstract

During the past two decades, the body of empirical research on warning design and evaluation has grown. Consequently, there are now basic principles and guidelines addressing warning design (e.g., signal words, color, symbols, and text/content), placement (e.g., location within product instructions), and how to enhance the usability of designs by considering factors internal to the user (e.g., beliefs, perceptions of risk, stress). Similarly, evaluation methods have been developed that can be used to measure the effectiveness of warnings such as the degree to which warnings are communicated to recipients and the degree to which they encourage or influence behavioral compliance. An overview of the empirical literature on warning guidelines and evaluation approaches is provided. Researchers, practitioners, and manufacturers can use these guidelines in various contexts to reduce the likelihood that injury and product damage from exposure to a hazard will occur.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12164506     DOI: 10.1016/s0003-6870(02)00009-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Ergon        ISSN: 0003-6870            Impact factor:   3.661


  25 in total

1.  Applying human factors principles to alert design increases efficiency and reduces prescribing errors in a scenario-based simulation.

Authors:  Alissa L Russ; Alan J Zillich; Brittany L Melton; Scott A Russell; Siying Chen; Jeffrey R Spina; Michael Weiner; Elizabette G Johnson; Joanne K Daggy; M Sue McManus; Jason M Hawsey; Anthony G Puleo; Bradley N Doebbeling; Jason J Saleem
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2014-03-25       Impact factor: 4.497

2.  Examining Interpretations of Graphic Cigarette Warning Labels Among U.S. Youth and Adults.

Authors:  Amy McQueen; Erika A Waters; Kimberly A Kaphingst; Charlene A Caburnay; Vetta L Sanders Thompson; Sonia Boyum; Matthew W Kreuter
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2016-07-13

3.  Efficacy of Canadian health warning statements on caffeinated energy drinks: an experimental study among young Canadians.

Authors:  Danielle Wiggers; Jessica L Reid; David Hammond
Journal:  Health Educ Res       Date:  2020-12-23

4.  Responses of young adults to graphic warning labels for cigarette packages.

Authors:  Linda D Cameron; Jessica K Pepper; Noel T Brewer
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2013-04-26       Impact factor: 7.552

5.  Hazard levels of warning signal words modulate the inhibition of return effect: evidence from the event-related potential P300.

Authors:  Qian Shang; Yujing Huang; Qingguo Ma
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-06-09       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  The effect of graphics on environmental health risk beliefs, emotions, behavioral intentions, and recall.

Authors:  Dolores J Severtson; Jeffrey B Henriques
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 4.000

7.  Long-Run Trends in Antidepressant Use Among Youths After the FDA Black Box Warning.

Authors:  Nilay Kafali; Ana Progovac; Sherry Shu-Yeu Hou; Benjamin Lê Cook
Journal:  Psychiatr Serv       Date:  2017-12-15       Impact factor: 3.084

8.  Standardised (plain) cigarette packaging increases attention to both text-based and graphical health warnings: experimental evidence.

Authors:  M Shankleman; C Sykes; K L Mandeville; S Di Costa; K Yarrow
Journal:  Public Health       Date:  2014-12-24       Impact factor: 2.427

9.  Impact of tobacco-related health warning labels across socioeconomic, race and ethnic groups: results from a randomized web-based experiment.

Authors:  Jennifer Cantrell; Donna M Vallone; James F Thrasher; Rebekah H Nagler; Shari P Feirman; Larry R Muenz; David Y He; Kasisomayajula Viswanath
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-01-14       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Eye movements and brain oscillations to symbolic safety signs with different comprehensibility.

Authors:  Yohana Siswandari; Shuping Xiong
Journal:  J Physiol Anthropol       Date:  2015-12-10       Impact factor: 2.867

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.