Citation

Edworthy J, Hellier E, Morley N, Grey C, Aldrich K, Lee A. Hum. Factors 2004; 46(1): 11-31.

Affiliation

Department of Psychology, University of Plymouth, Drake Circus, Plymouth, Devon, PL4 8AA, UK. j.edworthy@plymouth.ac.uk

Copyright

(Copyright © 2004, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Publisher SAGE Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

15151153

Abstract

Three studies explored amateur and professional users' compliance with pesticide warning labels. Professionals were classified as people working in a profession in which the use of pesticides is a necessary part of their job. Amateurs used pesticides only in their leisure time. The first study showed that the wording used affected perception of the appropriateness of hazard statements, one of the most effective variations being the use of the personal pronoun (statements beginning "You should..."). The location of warning information was also found to affect actual compliance: Compliance increased when warning information was presented in the directions for use section. A supplemental directive increased compliance only for professional users. In a final study, "best-case" and "worst-case" linguistic variations were combined with best-case and worst-case locations for safety information. Instruction statements using the personal pronoun and presented in the directions for use section resulted in the highest levels of compliance. The differences in compliance between amateur and professional users are interpreted within the framework of Rasmussen's (1986) distinction among skill-, rule-, and knowledge-based behavior. Actual or potential applications of this research include the design of warning labels and safety information.

Language: en