Premium
Indirect warnings and instructions produce behavioral compliance
Author(s) -
Wogalter Michael S.,
Feng Eric
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
human factors and ergonomics in manufacturing and service industries
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.408
H-Index - 39
eISSN - 1520-6564
pISSN - 1090-8471
DOI - 10.1002/hfm.20190
Subject(s) - compliance (psychology) , task (project management) , computer science , computer security , product (mathematics) , reading (process) , hazard , internet privacy , psychology , applied psychology , social psychology , engineering , chemistry , geometry , mathematics , systems engineering , organic chemistry , law , political science
Most research on warnings assumes a direct flow of information from the source directly to receivers. Reading a manufacturer's product label or manual are examples of directly received warnings. Some communications, however, involve one or more intervening entities (e.g., another person or organization) that serve to convey warning information to the ultimate receiver. With indirect warnings the information does not come directly from the source manufacturer but comes from another entity. The present research examined whether indirectly received warnings benefit compliance in the absence of directly relayed warnings. Participants performed a computer‐memory installation task, in which compliance to three (subtask) behaviors given in the complete instructions/warnings was measured. The effectiveness of indirect warnings was evident. Indirect warning compliance was nearly as high as (but not significantly different from) the direct warning. Implications for the design of hazard communication systems and for warnings in forensic investigations are discussed. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.