Should occupational health and safety signs be evidence-based?

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

There are a range of safety signs and symbols that duty holders and employers provide in workplaces, public places and elsewhere. The design and location of signage are typically standardized and in compliance with health and safety regulations, such as the United Kingdom’s Health and Safety (Safety Signs and Signals) Regulations 1996, creating an illusion that they are authoritative and evidence-based. This is aided by the harmonization and normalization of specific signs across the European Union (EU), as dictated by an EU Directive, and to some extent globally, so that signs are the same in different countries, although their specific requirements and regulations and laws differ across countries. There is also an assumption that everyone understands the meanings of safety signs and symbols. Yet, these conventions need to be scrutinized to ensure that health and safety information is being communicated appropriately and effectively. Arguably, safety signs are clear and have legible words and messages and universally recognized visual symbols, making the identification of prohibited actions, safeguards to follow, and warnings of potential hazards much easier and quicker. Yet, there is no evidence for the effectiveness of certain wording, symbols and colours over alternative options. Also, although signs in the workplace are likely to be understood by employees who have undertaken health and safety training (and, ideally, refresher training), research on this topic is lacking, and it is not clear if the public understands the safety signs encountered in daily life. Research is urgently needed on safety signs to ensure they are evidence-based.