English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In the field of forensic human factors, experts are often called upon to assess and evaluate the adequacy of new or existing products' warnings or warnings systems. The usual goal of this evaluation is to arrive at a simple binary decision regarding the warning in question (i.e., does it "pass/fail", or is it "adequate/inadequate"). However, such a warning assessment process may in fact be quite complex and multidimensional in its execution. The existing warnings research literature has identified a fairly large number of warnings features or factors likely to have an impact on a given warning's effectiveness or adequacy. The tool addressed in this article is intended for use by a warnings expert (as opposed to one less knowledgeable and informed about complex warnings issues), and can serve as a reminder checklist to help ensure that the expert has taken into consideration the most relevant features or factors during such a warnings adequacy assessment.

Ratings checklist for warnings: a prototype tool to aid experts in the adequacy evaluation of proposed or existing warnings