{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023558082859463852, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004061738424045491, 'mean_word_length': 5.73224043715847, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Influence of Position, Highlighting, and Imbedding on Warning Effectiveness

An experiment utilizing 195 subjects investigated the behavoral influence of varying warning position, highlighting and imbeddedness on warning detection, recall and compliance. Subjects were given an unfamiliar consumer product to actually use, and direct behavioral observation and follow-up questions were utilized to measure the percentage of subjects who noticed, read and complied with the warning, plus the amount of information subjects could recall about the specific cause, nature and prevention of the danger. There was a steady decline in the number of subjects who first noticed, then read, and finally followed the warning across all measures. Imbedding information critical to warning compliance within the warning section was the only variable found to influence warning compliance. Imbedding the critical warning information significantly reducing warning compliance as compared to the beginning the warning section with the critical information (i.e., the unimbedded condition). Warnings were shown to be effective (47% when unimbedded). Clearly, however, consumer warnings could be improved further, by utilizing fail safe designs.