Exploring Perception of Warning Labels: Insights from Color, Signal Words, and Symbol Evaluation

Safety Pub Date : 2024-06-14 DOI:10.3390/safety10020052
Miskeen Ali Gopang, Tauha Hussain Ali, S. Shaikh
{"title":"Exploring Perception of Warning Labels: Insights from Color, Signal Words, and Symbol Evaluation","authors":"Miskeen Ali Gopang, Tauha Hussain Ali, S. Shaikh","doi":"10.3390/safety10020052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Protecting people from the risks associated with products is a critical concern in today’s economy. Pakistan, being the world’s fifth most populous country, lacks the framework of warning labels and therefore faces a significant gap in product warning labels. Pakistan is a representative of a number of countries that export a variety of products to Pakistan; however, warning labels on these goods are typically in English, which might mislead people of Pakistan in perceiving the hazard level. It is therefore imperative to conduct research into the non-textual and cross-cultural understanding of labels from the perspective of Pakistan. This study examined the applicability of ANSI Z535.4 in the context of Pakistan. A total of 66 (34 male and 32 female) undergraduate students with a mean age of 20.5 participated in this study. A meticulous experiment was designed using a nine-point rating scale with anchors on both sides, where one represented ‘not at all hazardous’ and nine represented ‘extremely hazardous’. Participants rated each component of warning labels, i.e., color, symbol, signal words, and their complex configurations. The results showed alignment with the ANSI Z535.4 standards for some components (i.e., colors, symbols, and signal words) and complex configurations, whereas no significant difference was found in perceived hazard levels between green (M = 3.167), blue (M = 3.591, and yellow (M = 3.652) colors, with a p-value greater than 0.05. Participants did not differentiate significantly between signal words, i.e., caution (M = 5.182) and warning (M = 5.879). Participants also did not differentiate significantly between complex configurations, i.e., safety alert–caution–yellow (M = 5.076) and safety alert–warning–orange (M = 5.197), with p-values greater than 0.05. These results state that discrepancies in the perception of warning labels exist. This study is the first of its kind conducted in the context of Pakistan, which will help policy makers to consider the findings before implementing a policy. In fact, differences in perception could result in failure to take appropriate precautions. Nonetheless, these nuances can be overcome with proper awareness through training for the people.","PeriodicalId":509460,"journal":{"name":"Safety","volume":"119 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/safety10020052","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Protecting people from the risks associated with products is a critical concern in today’s economy. Pakistan, being the world’s fifth most populous country, lacks the framework of warning labels and therefore faces a significant gap in product warning labels. Pakistan is a representative of a number of countries that export a variety of products to Pakistan; however, warning labels on these goods are typically in English, which might mislead people of Pakistan in perceiving the hazard level. It is therefore imperative to conduct research into the non-textual and cross-cultural understanding of labels from the perspective of Pakistan. This study examined the applicability of ANSI Z535.4 in the context of Pakistan. A total of 66 (34 male and 32 female) undergraduate students with a mean age of 20.5 participated in this study. A meticulous experiment was designed using a nine-point rating scale with anchors on both sides, where one represented ‘not at all hazardous’ and nine represented ‘extremely hazardous’. Participants rated each component of warning labels, i.e., color, symbol, signal words, and their complex configurations. The results showed alignment with the ANSI Z535.4 standards for some components (i.e., colors, symbols, and signal words) and complex configurations, whereas no significant difference was found in perceived hazard levels between green (M = 3.167), blue (M = 3.591, and yellow (M = 3.652) colors, with a p-value greater than 0.05. Participants did not differentiate significantly between signal words, i.e., caution (M = 5.182) and warning (M = 5.879). Participants also did not differentiate significantly between complex configurations, i.e., safety alert–caution–yellow (M = 5.076) and safety alert–warning–orange (M = 5.197), with p-values greater than 0.05. These results state that discrepancies in the perception of warning labels exist. This study is the first of its kind conducted in the context of Pakistan, which will help policy makers to consider the findings before implementing a policy. In fact, differences in perception could result in failure to take appropriate precautions. Nonetheless, these nuances can be overcome with proper awareness through training for the people.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
探索对警告标签的感知:从颜色、信号词和符号评估中获得启示
保护人们免受与产品相关的风险是当今经济中的一个重要问题。巴基斯坦作为世界上人口第五多的国家,缺乏警示标签的框架,因此在产品警示标签方面面临着巨大的差距。巴基斯坦是许多国家的代表,这些国家向巴基斯坦出口各种产品;然而,这些产品上的警告标签通常是英文的,这可能会误导巴基斯坦人民对危险程度的认识。因此,从巴基斯坦的角度对标签的非文本和跨文化理解进行研究势在必行。本研究考察了 ANSI Z535.4 在巴基斯坦的适用性。共有 66 名(34 名男生和 32 名女生)平均年龄为 20.5 岁的本科生参与了本研究。我们设计了一个细致的实验,采用九点评分法,两边都有锚点,1 代表 "完全不危险",9 代表 "极度危险"。参与者对警告标签的每个组成部分,即颜色、符号、信号词及其复杂配置进行评分。结果表明,某些部分(即颜色、符号和信号词)和复杂配置与 ANSI Z535.4 标准一致,而绿色(中值=3.167)、蓝色(中值=3.591)和黄色(中值=3.652)之间的感知危险程度没有显著差异,P 值大于 0.05。受试者对信号词,即小心(M = 5.182)和警告(M = 5.879)的区分不明显。参与者对复杂配置,即安全警报-注意-黄色(M = 5.076)和安全警报-警告-橙色(M = 5.197)的区分也不明显,P 值均大于 0.05。这些结果表明,人们对警告标签的认知存在差异。这是首次在巴基斯坦开展此类研究,有助于决策者在实施政策前考虑研究结果。事实上,认知上的差异可能导致人们无法采取适当的预防措施。不过,只要通过培训提高人们的正确认识,就可以克服这些细微差别。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of Shoulder Risk Factors in the Repetitive Task of Slaughterhouse Operational Management and Improvement Strategies of Evacuation Centers during the 2024 Noto Peninsula Earthquake—A Case Study of Wajima City An Analysis of Occupational Hazards Based on the Physical Ergonomics Dimension to Improve the Occupational Health of Agricultural Workers: The Case in Mayo Valley, Mexico Review of Integrated Management Systems to Re-Engineer Existing Nonconformances Troubleshooting System Subjective Effects of Using a Passive Upper Limb Exoskeleton for Industrial Textile Workers
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1