Comprehension and memory for warning symbols: age-related differences and impact of training

Problem: Prior research indicates that many warning symbols are poorly understood, particularly by the elderly. Method: The effectiveness of three different training conditions to improve comprehension and memory for warning symbols was assessed for younger (18–35 years of age) and older (50–67 years of age) participants. All three conditions paired the symbols with associated text during training; however they differed in the extent to which they further elaborated on the meanings of the symbols. Results: Training substantially improved accuracy and speed of responding on a comprehension test; however there was little difference among conditions. Additionally, while the magnitude of the training effect was similar for both age groups, older participants performed much more poorly than younger participants, both before (37% vs. 52% correct) and after training (68% vs. 88% correct on the immediate post-test), and found it more difficult to reject incorrect meanings (55% vs. 68% correct). Conclusion: Relatively simple training conditions can dramatically improve accuracy and speed of responding to warning symbols. Impact on industry: Training should be used to improve warning symbol comprehension since failures to adequately understand warning information may lead to injury or death. Furthermore, attempts should be made to address individual differences in warning processing such as those related to changes in cognitive processing across the lifespan.