A cross-cultural comparison of perceived hazard in response to warning components and configurations: US vs. China.

There is increasing momentum towards international harmonization of warning standards. Therefore, it is critical to determine the applicability of existing standards across different cultures. Perceived hazard in response to isolated warning components (colors, signal words and symbols) and warning configurations was examined as a function of culture of the product-user (US vs. China) to determine the extent to which ANSI (American National Standards Institute)-recommended components/configurations communicate the expected level of hazard across cultures. 40 college students in the US and 43 in China rated colors, signal words, symbols, and complex configurations on a scale from 1 (not at all hazardous) to 9 (extremely hazardous). US participants consistently provided higher ratings of perceived hazard than Chinese participants. Cross-cultural differences were also observed in the relative levels of perceived hazard assigned to different levels of a label component, particularly in response to colors. However, relative levels of perceived hazard among more complex configurations were similar across culture, even though Chinese participants continued to provide lower absolute ratings of perceived hazard. These results have important implications--if it is assumed that perceived hazard-level must attain some threshold value in order to trigger compliance, then differences in perception could result in a failure of product-users to take appropriate precautions.

[1]  C. Nygård,et al.  Proceedings of the 13th triennial congress of the international ergonomics association , 1997 .

[2]  A. Chapanis Hazards associated with three signal words and four colours on warning signs , 1994 .

[3]  Tonya L Smith-Jackson,et al.  Cultural Ergonomics in Ghana, West Africa: A Descriptive Survey of Industry and Trade Workers’ Interpretations of Safety Symbols , 2002, International journal of occupational safety and ergonomics : JOSE.

[4]  S L Young Connotation of hazard for signal words and their associated panels. , 1998, Applied ergonomics.

[5]  G. Hofstede,et al.  Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind , 1991 .

[6]  S. David Leonard Does color of warnings affect risk perception , 1999 .

[7]  Curt C. Braun,et al.  Interaction of Warning Label Features: Determining the Contributions of Three Warning Characteristics , 1995 .

[8]  Michael S. Wogalter,et al.  Hazard Associations of Warning Header Components , 1995 .

[9]  Ravindra S. Goonetilleke,et al.  Safety Signal Words and Color Codes: The Perception of Implied Hazard by Chinese People , .

[10]  Bernd Rohrmann,et al.  Risk perception in China and Australia: an exploratory crosscultural study , 1999 .

[11]  Keyla Friedmann,et al.  The effect of adding symbols to written warning labels on user behavior and recall , 1988 .

[12]  Pei-Luen Patrick Rau,et al.  Good computing systems for everyone – how on earth? Cultural aspects , 2008, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[13]  Michael S. Wogalter,et al.  Hazard Level Perceptions of Current and Proposed Warning Sign and Label Panels , 1995 .

[14]  S. David Leonard,et al.  How Does the Population Interpret Warning Signals? , 1986 .

[15]  M S Wogalter,et al.  Influence of Warning Label Signal Words on Perceived Hazard Level , 1994, Human factors.

[16]  Michael S. Wogalter,et al.  Broadening the Range of Signal Words , 1989 .

[17]  Gavriel Salvendy,et al.  Chinese perceptions of implied hazard for signal words and surround shapes , 2004 .

[18]  Michael S. Wogalter,et al.  Handbook of Warnings , 2006 .

[19]  M S Wogalter,et al.  Warning signal words: connoted strength and understandability by children, elders, and non-native English speakers. , 1995, Ergonomics.

[20]  Michael S. Wogalter,et al.  Effects of Warning Signal Words on Consumer-Product Hazard Perceptions , 1992 .