Noah Bosshart , Angela Bearth , Sandro E. Stutz , Stephanie Wermelinger , Moritz M. Daum , Michael Siegrist
{"title":"避免家用化学品造成意外伤害:从儿童、照顾者和专家的角度比较化学品对儿童的吸引力","authors":"Noah Bosshart , Angela Bearth , Sandro E. Stutz , Stephanie Wermelinger , Moritz M. Daum , Michael Siegrist","doi":"10.1016/j.apergo.2024.104401","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study investigated whether caregivers and regulatory experts can predict the appeal of household chemicals for children and explored determinants of differences between adults' and children's child-appeal rating. We invited <em>N</em> = 95 4-year-old children and their caregivers to a laboratory study. Both independently ranked 16 household chemicals from the least to the most child-appealing product. In addition to the laboratory study, we sent an online adaptation of this ranking task to <em>N</em> = 46 experts involved in the monitoring and authorizing of household chemicals. Our findings show that the aggregated child-appeal rating of household chemicals was highly similar among caregivers, experts, and children. When comparing child-appeal ratings of household chemicals with and without child-appealing images, caregivers and experts did well in predicting which products might appeal to children. Finally, our findings show that the similarity between individual caregivers' and their own children's child-appeal ratings of household chemicals varied substantially. To conclude, although adults can assess the general child-appeal of household chemicals, they need to consider that the actual appeal of a household chemical can vary considerably among individual children. Instead of regulating specific product attributes, policymakers should prioritize educating caregivers about pitfalls and misconceptions that hinder effective injury prevention.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":55502,"journal":{"name":"Applied Ergonomics","volume":"122 ","pages":"Article 104401"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Avoiding unintentional injuries from household chemicals: Comparing the appeal to children from the perspectives of children, caregivers, and experts\",\"authors\":\"Noah Bosshart , Angela Bearth , Sandro E. Stutz , Stephanie Wermelinger , Moritz M. Daum , Michael Siegrist\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.apergo.2024.104401\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This study investigated whether caregivers and regulatory experts can predict the appeal of household chemicals for children and explored determinants of differences between adults' and children's child-appeal rating. We invited <em>N</em> = 95 4-year-old children and their caregivers to a laboratory study. Both independently ranked 16 household chemicals from the least to the most child-appealing product. In addition to the laboratory study, we sent an online adaptation of this ranking task to <em>N</em> = 46 experts involved in the monitoring and authorizing of household chemicals. Our findings show that the aggregated child-appeal rating of household chemicals was highly similar among caregivers, experts, and children. When comparing child-appeal ratings of household chemicals with and without child-appealing images, caregivers and experts did well in predicting which products might appeal to children. Finally, our findings show that the similarity between individual caregivers' and their own children's child-appeal ratings of household chemicals varied substantially. To conclude, although adults can assess the general child-appeal of household chemicals, they need to consider that the actual appeal of a household chemical can vary considerably among individual children. Instead of regulating specific product attributes, policymakers should prioritize educating caregivers about pitfalls and misconceptions that hinder effective injury prevention.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55502,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Ergonomics\",\"volume\":\"122 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104401\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Ergonomics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003687024001789\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Ergonomics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003687024001789","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本研究调查了看护者和监管专家能否预测家用化学品对儿童的吸引力,并探讨了成人和儿童对儿童吸引力评级差异的决定因素。我们邀请了 N = 95 名 4 岁儿童及其看护人参加实验室研究。两人分别对 16 种家用化学品从最不吸引儿童的产品到最吸引儿童的产品进行排序。除实验室研究外,我们还向 N = 46 名参与家用化学品监控和授权的专家发送了这一排名任务的在线改编版。我们的研究结果表明,照料者、专家和儿童对家用化学品的儿童喜爱度综合评分非常相似。在比较有和没有儿童吸引力图像的家用化学品的儿童吸引力评级时,护理人员和专家在预测哪些产品可能吸引儿童方面表现良好。最后,我们的研究结果表明,个别照顾者和他们自己的孩子对家用化学品的儿童吸引力评级之间的相似度差别很大。总之,尽管成人可以对家用化学品的一般儿童吸引力进行评估,但他们需要考虑到不同儿童对家用化学品的实际吸引力可能会有很大差异。政策制定者应该优先教育看护者认识到妨碍有效预防伤害的陷阱和误解,而不是对具体的产品属性进行监管。
Avoiding unintentional injuries from household chemicals: Comparing the appeal to children from the perspectives of children, caregivers, and experts
This study investigated whether caregivers and regulatory experts can predict the appeal of household chemicals for children and explored determinants of differences between adults' and children's child-appeal rating. We invited N = 95 4-year-old children and their caregivers to a laboratory study. Both independently ranked 16 household chemicals from the least to the most child-appealing product. In addition to the laboratory study, we sent an online adaptation of this ranking task to N = 46 experts involved in the monitoring and authorizing of household chemicals. Our findings show that the aggregated child-appeal rating of household chemicals was highly similar among caregivers, experts, and children. When comparing child-appeal ratings of household chemicals with and without child-appealing images, caregivers and experts did well in predicting which products might appeal to children. Finally, our findings show that the similarity between individual caregivers' and their own children's child-appeal ratings of household chemicals varied substantially. To conclude, although adults can assess the general child-appeal of household chemicals, they need to consider that the actual appeal of a household chemical can vary considerably among individual children. Instead of regulating specific product attributes, policymakers should prioritize educating caregivers about pitfalls and misconceptions that hinder effective injury prevention.
期刊介绍:
Applied Ergonomics is aimed at ergonomists and all those interested in applying ergonomics/human factors in the design, planning and management of technical and social systems at work or leisure. Readership is truly international with subscribers in over 50 countries. Professionals for whom Applied Ergonomics is of interest include: ergonomists, designers, industrial engineers, health and safety specialists, systems engineers, design engineers, organizational psychologists, occupational health specialists and human-computer interaction specialists.