David Matthews

How Does the Population Interpret Warning Signals

The experiment concerns the problem of responding appropriately to warnings. Some organizations, such as the military and the American National Standards Institute have adopted particular meanings for certain signal words. The population at large is not trained in these respects. Therefore, it is not known how they interpret different signal words. In keeping with the assumption that the stronger the warning, the more likely it will be heeded, an effort was made to determine how the population in general differentiates levels of warnings. The study examined population stereotypes for various signal words. Contrary to some studies (cf. Karnes and Leonard, 1986), no differences were found in ratings of perception of risk to different signal words. Further, size of the signal word and color of the signal word had no effect on perception of risk. Statements of consequences of disregarding the warnings and type of risk situation did affect rated perception of risk. Also, circumstances in which the subjects might be placed affected ratings of likelihood of disregarding warnings. These results were discussed in terms of an adaptation level of information for perception of risk.

DAVID DREW: TRIBUTES & MEMORIES (I)

In 1953 or thereabouts a London concert was announced containing the British premiere of Pierrot Lunaire , an epoch-making work as appeared to be the case from every book on music history I had been able to lay my hands on. So I got the score from the Pendlebury Library in the Cambridge Music School and duly became fascinated and perplexed. I then had a visit from David Drew, an undergraduate one year ahead of me. He had also wanted to see the score and had asked Charles Cudworth, the Pendelbury Librarian, how he could get in touch with the person who had taken it out. This was how I got to know David.