Do prominent warnings make packaging less attractive?

Highlights

• We examined whether prominent warning pictograms affect packaging attractiveness.

• The noticeability of prominent pictograms was measured by eye tracking technology.

• Packaging attractiveness was evaluated by users’ Likert ratings.

• Highly noticeable prominent pictograms did not decrease the packaging’s attractiveness.

Abstract

Despite the importance of packaging attractiveness in product perception, limited research was done on the possible effects of warning messages on the packaging’s visual appeal. Our study investigated the attractiveness of the packaging with prominent and non-prominent warning pictograms. Before this, prominent design properties (i.e. large size and thick lines), which make pictograms highly noticeable, were identified by eye-tracking measurements. The packaging samples were designed especially for the purpose of the study. The results showed that large and thick pictograms were noticed more quickly than small and thin pictograms, and this did not affect people’s perception of the packaging’s attractiveness. Our findings encourage manufacturers to use highly noticeable pictograms in order to increase the likelihood of being detected more easily by the users. This is an important step closer to proper handling of the product.

Introduction

Besides its primary function of protecting the product, packaging also serves as a communication medium between the manufacturers and the users. Among other information, it can deliver instructions for use and warnings (Hammond, 2011, Laughery et al., 1991, Stewart and Martin, 1994). Some of the most important warnings are those related to the safe use of a product. Safety information can be presented in the form of a pictogram or text, or any combination thereof. There are several valid reasons for using pictograms on product packaging. Firstly, pictograms can facilitate warning comprehension. This is crucial for users who cannot read or might not understand the language on the packaging label (Wogalter et al., 2002). Secondly, pictograms are compact visual forms. They can convey the same amount of information as text (or an even greater amount) while taking up less display area. Thus, in the case of limited packaging surface, they are considered to be more efficient than text (Bruyas et al., 1998). Another reason for their frequent use on packaging is their legibility. Assuming that they are simplified enough, pictograms can be recognised more quickly than the equivalent textual information (Edworthy and Adams, 1996), which is especially relevant when viewing a packaging at-a-glance before the use of the product.

These safety messages have a potential to indirectly protect users from negative consequences which, in some cases, can be even life threatening. Many accidents may have been prevented if users had viewed the on-product warnings (Zuckerman and Chaiken, 1998). That is why warning labels should be conspicuous and legible (Ayres et al., 1989). Without clearly printed information which the audience can easily process, packaging does not fulfil its communication role, and in so fails in protecting users through its graphic design. In this light, special interest should be given to the prominence of the warnings, mainly because of its crucial role in the process of communicating safety messages (Wogalter et al., 2002). The starting point for this idea of the necessity of noticeability in efficient warning systems is the three-stage model offered by Laughery and Wogalter (2014). According to this model, the effectiveness of warnings is based on three stages that depend on each other. The stages are: noticing (the detection of warning), understanding (the interpretation of the meaning of the warning), and complying (behaving in accordance with the warning). The efficacy of one stage affects the following one. Thus, noticeability is the first, and a prerequisite, requirement that a pictogram should fulfil in order to open the possibility of the continuation of valid safety communication (Wogalter et al., 2002). For the purposes of this paper, we focused our attention only on the first stage (i.e. the noticing).

When it comes to the factors influencing the noticeability of the warnings, previous studies suggest that size and thickness are some of the design features which make the information more prominent. For example, Barlow and Wogalter (1991a) investigated the effects of conspicuous warnings in print ads. The results showed that larger and bold designs increased the likelihood of the viewer seeing the warnings. This was in line with other studies focused on cigarette packages that reported on enhancing the noticeability of warnings by increasing their size (Hammond et al., 2007, Nilsson, 1999). Thereby, one of the purposes of our study was to investigate how the characteristics of the safety pictogram (such as its size and thickness) can make it more prominent on the packaging.

As noted by Chen et al. (2015), the effectiveness of a warning may depend on various characteristics, including the warning itself. Manufacturers often rely on national and international legislation that provide optional guidelines for designing effective warning labels (for example EN, 2007, International Association for Soaps Detergents and Maintenance Products, 2014). However, in many cases they have their own opinion on how relevant information should be designed and positioned on the packaging, so the best possible aesthetic appearance can be achieved. This is not surprising due to the significant role of packaging attractiveness in brand presentation (Parhizgar and Rostami, 2014) and the manufacturers’ sale success. A growing body of research demonstrates the impact of packaging appearance on potential buyers (Littel and Orth, 2013, Machiels and Karnal, 2016, Magnier and Schoormans, 2015, Orth et al., 2010). According to some reported results, appealing packaging can drive the buyers’ choice (Reimann et al., 2010, Van der Laan et al., 2012) and affect the perception of product quality (Delgado et al., 2013, Magnier et al., 2016, Wang, 2013). Manufacturers tend to give priority to the decorative role of packaging. Their packaging designers use embellishments and enhancements to attract the consumers’ attention (Hurley et al., 2016). In their endeavours to achieve exclusivity and an aesthetically pleasing appearance of the packaging, manufacturers often reduce the area available for the application of safety pictograms. Furthermore, their decisions regarding the position of the pictograms is in many instances guided by the tendency to point up positive characteristics of the product by presenting them on the most noticeable parts of the packaging. It is reasonable that manufacturers and designers are keen on highlighting those elements on the packaging which make it attractive at the point of sale. However, in doing so, they should not degrade the importance of visual cues on the packaging that may prevent the misuse of the product. That is why we were especially interested in the problem of refraining from salient positioning of safety messages due to the potential decrease in visual attractiveness. In particular, our aim was to examine whether prominent pictograms affect the users’ perception of packaging attractiveness.