Incidental Exposure to Rotating Warnings on Alcoholic Beverage Labels

No previous research has been published specifically aimed at determining the effectiveness of rotating warnings (as is required in the government-mandated cigarette warnings). This issue has become relevant because decisions may be made with respect to rotating warnings in print and broadcast alcoholic beverage advertisements, and perhaps for labels and ads for other products as well. The present study used 80 participants in a controlled incidental-exposure laboratory experiment. The effect of the current government warning label for alcoholic beverages was compared to a 5-warning and a 10-warning rotating scheme as well as a no-warning control condition. The study was disguised as marketing research where participants were incidentally exposed to the warnings while evaluating a set of alcoholic beverage labels. The dependent measure was performance on a test of alcohol facts and hazards. Findings show that the present single government warning label is inadequate compared to multiple (rotated) warnings. The 10-warning condition produced higher test scores than either the single government warning or no-warning conditions. Overall, the 5-warning condition produced intermediate levels of knowledge. Also, four exposures produced greater specific warning content knowledge than either two or no exposures. The results suggest that rotating multiple warnings are a better means of communicating facts and hazards than a single repeated warning of limited content. Policy implications are discussed.