Do prominent warnings make packaging less attractive?
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.
Section snippets
Hypotheses
Our choice of the dependent variables was driven by our literature review. The authors from the field of human factors and consumer safety suggest that noticeability is a necessary attribute of a safety message (Laughery and Wogalter, 2014, Wogalter et al., 2002), while the researchers in the field of packaging design emphasize that the attractiveness of the packaging can be an important factor in affecting the perception of the product and the drive to buy a product (Reimann et al., 2010, Van
Overview of the present research
Our research study was conducted through two experiments, one for each of the hypothesis. The aim of the first experiment was to determine the design parameters of prominent safety pictograms that make them noticeable. After identifying determinants of noticeable pictograms, we used them as independent factors in our second experiment. The second experiment sought to demonstrate the impact of noticeable pictograms on the packaging attractiveness.
Discussion
One of the goals of this study was to determine whether pictogram size and thickness can make a pictogram on packaging prominent enough to be easily noticed. Additionally, we wanted to explore the possibility of negative influence of prominent pictograms on packaging attractiveness.
As the majority of users do not always search for safety information, pictograms that convey safety messages should be highly noticeable. When it comes to the design parameters of pictograms, our data analysis showed
Conclusions
With a growing number of new products that lead to reinforced competition between different brands, the visual appeal of the packaging is an important issue. When thinking about packaging attractiveness, both aesthetic and communicative aspects of the packaging design need to be considered so that the users’ dissatisfaction can be avoided. Adopting this approach, our study shed light on the impact of the warning’s design features, not only in terms of risk communication, but also in terms of
Funding sources
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
References (77)
- et al.
Ergonomic guidelines for the design of pictorial information
Int. J. Ind. Ergon.
(1998) - et al.
Characteristics of warning labels for drug containers and their effects on perceived hazardousness
Saf. Sci.
(2015) - et al.
Evaluating bottles and labels versus tasting the oils blind: Effects of packaging and labeling on consumer preferences, purchase intentions and expectations for extra virgin olive oil
Food Res. Int.
(2013) - et al.
Advancing the aesthetic middle principle: Trade-offs in design attractiveness and strength
J. Bus. Res.
(2014) - et al.
Eye tracking and nutrition label use: A review of the literature and recommendations for label enhancement
Food Policy
(2012) - et al.
Text and graphic warnings on cigarette packages: Findings from the International Tobacco Control Four Country Study
Am. J. Prev. Med.
(2007) - et al.
Healthy by design, but only when in focus: Communicating non-verbal health cues through symbolic meaning in packaging
Food Qual. Prefer.
(2016) - et al.
Characterization of emissions composition for selected household products available in Korea
J. Hazard. Mater.
(2007) - et al.
A review of using eye-tracking technology in exploring learning from 2000 to 2012
Educ. Res. Rev.
(2013) - et al.
A three-stage model summarizes product warning and environmental sign research
Saf. Sci.
(2014)
See how tasty it is? Effects of symbolic cues on product evaluation and taste
Food Qual. Prefer.
Consumer reactions to sustainable packaging: The interplay of visual appearance, verbal claim and environmental concern
J. Environ. Psychol.
Judging a product by its cover: Packaging sustainability and perceptions of quality in food products
Food Qual. Prefer.
The effect of visual product aesthetics on consumers’ price sensitivity
Procedia Econ. Financ.
Is Beauty in the aisles of the retailer? Package processing in visually complex contexts
J. Retail.
The identification of viewing patterns of chocolate snack packages using eye-tracking techniques
Food Qual. Prefer.
Aesthetic package design: A behavioral, neural, and psychological investigation
J. Consum. Psychol.
Location matters, especially for non-salient features-An eye-tracking study on the effects of web object placement on different types of websites
Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud.
Effects of pictorial size and circle-slash thickness on glance legibility for prohibitive symbols
Int. J. Ind. Ergon.
Fragranced consumer products: Chemicals emitted, ingredients unlisted
Environ. Impact Assess. Rev.
What is beautiful is usable
Interact. Comput.
Research-based guidelines for warning design and evaluation
Appl. Ergon.
Design principles for visual communication
Commun. ACM
Evaluation and analysis of household hazardous substances in Kuwait
Int. J. Environ. Pollut.
What is a warning and when will it work? Hum
Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. Proc.
Alcohol beverage warnings in print advertisements
Increasing the surface area on small product containers to facilitate communication of label information and warnings
Proc. Interf.
Alcoholic beverage warnings in magazine and television advertisements
J. Consum. Res.
Evaluation of a proposed space and missile warning symbology standard for graphical displays
Proc. Hum. Factors Soc. Annu. Meet.
Likelihood of reading warnings: The effect of fonts and font sizes
Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet.
How does design affect decision at point of sale?
J. Brand Manag.
Consumer interpretation of recycling signs on packaging
The effect of organic food labels on consumer attention
J. Food Prod. Mark.
Selective attention and the organization of visual information
J. Exp. Psychol. Gen.
Warning design: A research prospective
Response interpolation and scale sensitivity: Evidence against 5-point scales
J. Usability Stud.
Eye-tracking study of reading speed from LCD displays: Influence of type style and type size
J. Eye Mov. Res.
Cited by (7)
Consumers’ decision-making process when choosing potentially risky, frequently used chemical household products: The case of laundry detergents
2022, Environmental ResearchCitation Excerpt :This suggests an approach that manufacturers could use to decrease the number of accidents involving their products. Contrary to what would intuitively be expected, prior research has shown that more noticeable warnings do not decrease the attractiveness of a product (Kovačević et al., 2018), which indicates that this should not be a handicap when competing for market shares with other brands. Furthermore, the risk of campaigns by consumer groups due to accidents believed to be caused by ambiguous packaging of chemical household products could be reduced in this way (e.g. the case of the Fabuloso cleaner: Miller et al., 2006; Perton, 2006).
Review of the use of neurophysiological and biometric measures in experimental design research
2020, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing: AIEDAMUsing Eye-Tracking Data to Investigate the Noticeability of Safety Pictogram on Transparent Packaging
2023, Lecture Notes in Networks and SystemsExploring People’s Visual Perception and Its Impact on Evaluation of a Tiny House Prototype Using Eye Tracking Technology
2023, Lecture Notes in Mechanical EngineeringWarnings and Hazard Communications
2021, Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics