Interpretation and misinterpretation of warning signage : Perceptions of rockfalls in a naturalistic setting
- Authors: Aucote, Helen , Miner, Anthony , Dahlhaus, Peter
- Date: 2012
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Psychology, Health and Medicine Vol. 17, no. 5 (2012), p. 522-529
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: The aim of the present study was to investigate the factors relating to non-adherence to warning signs about falling rocks from coastal cliff faces. Face-to-face interviews (n=62) in a naturalistic setting (in the vicinity of a high-risk rockfall area) were conducted to investigate attention to and comprehension of warning signs, as well as beliefs relating to non-adherence of the signage. It was found that, while most participants could correctly identify the danger in the area and had noticed the warning signage, less than half of the participants could correctly interpret the signage. The perception of danger did not differ significantly between the participants who had, or had not, entered the high-risk zone. Differences in knowledge and beliefs between local residents and visitors to the area were identified. It was concluded that the warning signs did not provide enough detail for people to make informed decisions about safe behaviours. Comprehension of the signage may have been hampered by a lack of prior-knowledge of the particular risk, a failure to think carefully about the situation (i.e. low-effort processing), and the pictorial representation on the signs misleading the participants as to the true danger. © 2012 Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.
Rockfalls : Predicting high-risk behaviour from beliefs
- Authors: Aucote, Helen , Miner, Anthony , Dahlhaus, Peter
- Date: 2010
- Type: Journal article
- Relation: Disaster Prevention and Management Vol. 19, no. 1 (2010), p. 20-31
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to gain an understanding of the public's beliefs, attitudes and knowledge regarding rockfalls, and to see whether these variables could predict whether a person is likely to enter high-risk rockfall areas. Design/methodology/approach – A questionnaire was developed to measure beliefs (informed by the health belief model), knowledge, and previous behaviour in relation to rockfalls. Questions were also included to measure attitudes regarding rockfall caution signs. In total, 138 members of the general public completed the questionnaire. Findings – High-risk behaviour was more likely if the person was male and if the person had the belief that sign-posted high-risk areas were not dangerous. Further, believing that the sign-posted areas were not dangerous was more likely among people who held negative attitudes towards cautionary signs; specifically, these participants were more likely to doubt the validity of the warning signs. Research limitations/implications – The research was exploratory in nature. Further research should be conducted with a larger sample size and a more random selection of the general population. Ways of improving measurement of the variables are discussed. Practical implications – Efforts should be made to increase the public's perception of the validity of rockfall cautionary signs. Doing so may decrease injury and death as a result of rockfalls. Suggestions on ways to increase the validity of signage are made. Originality/value – It is presumed that this study is the first to attempt to gain an understanding of the beliefs and attitudes that may lead a person into engaging in high-risk behaviour in relation to rockfalls.