Editorial Type:
Article
Article Type:
Research Article

A Preliminary Look at the Social Perspective of Warn-on-Forecast: Preferred Tornado Warning Lead Time and the General Public’s Perceptions of Weather Risks

S. Hoekstra University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, and Research Experience for Undergraduates, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma

Search for other papers by S. Hoekstra in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
K. Klockow Oklahoma Climatological Survey, Norman, Oklahoma

Search for other papers by K. Klockow in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
R. Riley School of Meteorology, and Department of Communication, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma

Search for other papers by R. Riley in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
J. Brotzge Center for Analysis and Prediction of Storms, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma

Search for other papers by J. Brotzge in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
H. Brooks National Severe Storms Laboratory, Norman, Oklahoma

Search for other papers by H. Brooks in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
, and
S. Erickson Oklahoma Climatological Survey, Norman, Oklahoma

Search for other papers by S. Erickson in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
Print Publication:
01 Apr 2011
Collections:
Tornado Warning, Preparedness, and Impacts
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1175/2011WCAS1076.1
Page(s):
128–140
Restricted access

Abstract

Tornado warnings are currently issued an average of 13 min in advance of a tornado and are based on a warn-on-detection paradigm. However, computer model improvements may allow for a new warning paradigm, warn-on-forecast, to be established in the future. This would mean that tornado warnings could be issued one to two hours in advance, prior to storm initiation. In anticipation of the technological innovation, this study inquires whether the warn-on-forecast paradigm for tornado warnings may be preferred by the public (i.e., individuals and households). The authors sample is drawn from visitors to the National Weather Center in Norman, Oklahoma. During the summer and fall of 2009, surveys were distributed to 320 participants to assess their understanding and perception of weather risks and preferred tornado warning lead time. Responses were analyzed according to several different parameters including age, region of residency, educational level, number of children, and prior tornado experience. A majority of the respondents answered many of the weather risk questions correctly. They seemed to be familiar with tornado seasons; however, they were unaware of the relative number of fatalities caused by tornadoes and several additional weather phenomena each year in the United States. The preferred lead time was 34.3 min according to average survey responses. This suggests that while the general public may currently prefer a longer average lead time than the present system offers, the preference does not extend to the 1–2-h time frame theoretically offered by the warn-on-forecast system. When asked what they would do if given a 1-h lead time, respondents reported that taking shelter was a lesser priority than when given a 15-min lead time, and fleeing the area became a slightly more popular alternative. A majority of respondents also reported the situation would feel less life threatening if given a 1-h lead time. These results suggest that how the public responds to longer lead times may be complex and situationally dependent, and further study must be conducted to ascertain the users for whom the longer lead times would carry the most value. These results form the basis of an informative stated-preference approach to predicting public response to long (>1 h) warning lead times, using public understanding of the risks posed by severe weather events to contextualize lead-time demand.

Current affiliation: Department of Geography and Environmental Sustainability, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma.

Current affiliation: Oklahoma Climatological Survey, Norman, Oklahoma.

Corresponding author address: Stephanie Hoekstra, 120 David L. Boren Blvd., Suite 2100, Norman OK 73072. E-mail: shoekstra@ou.edu

This article is included in the Tornado Warning, Preparedness, and Impacts Special Collection.

Abstract

Tornado warnings are currently issued an average of 13 min in advance of a tornado and are based on a warn-on-detection paradigm. However, computer model improvements may allow for a new warning paradigm, warn-on-forecast, to be established in the future. This would mean that tornado warnings could be issued one to two hours in advance, prior to storm initiation. In anticipation of the technological innovation, this study inquires whether the warn-on-forecast paradigm for tornado warnings may be preferred by the public (i.e., individuals and households). The authors sample is drawn from visitors to the National Weather Center in Norman, Oklahoma. During the summer and fall of 2009, surveys were distributed to 320 participants to assess their understanding and perception of weather risks and preferred tornado warning lead time. Responses were analyzed according to several different parameters including age, region of residency, educational level, number of children, and prior tornado experience. A majority of the respondents answered many of the weather risk questions correctly. They seemed to be familiar with tornado seasons; however, they were unaware of the relative number of fatalities caused by tornadoes and several additional weather phenomena each year in the United States. The preferred lead time was 34.3 min according to average survey responses. This suggests that while the general public may currently prefer a longer average lead time than the present system offers, the preference does not extend to the 1–2-h time frame theoretically offered by the warn-on-forecast system. When asked what they would do if given a 1-h lead time, respondents reported that taking shelter was a lesser priority than when given a 15-min lead time, and fleeing the area became a slightly more popular alternative. A majority of respondents also reported the situation would feel less life threatening if given a 1-h lead time. These results suggest that how the public responds to longer lead times may be complex and situationally dependent, and further study must be conducted to ascertain the users for whom the longer lead times would carry the most value. These results form the basis of an informative stated-preference approach to predicting public response to long (>1 h) warning lead times, using public understanding of the risks posed by severe weather events to contextualize lead-time demand.

Current affiliation: Department of Geography and Environmental Sustainability, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma.

Current affiliation: Oklahoma Climatological Survey, Norman, Oklahoma.

Corresponding author address: Stephanie Hoekstra, 120 David L. Boren Blvd., Suite 2100, Norman OK 73072. E-mail: shoekstra@ou.edu

This article is included in the Tornado Warning, Preparedness, and Impacts Special Collection.

Save
Cover Weather, Climate, and Society
Weather, Climate, and Society

  • Ashley, W., 2007: Spatial and temporal analysis of tornado fatalities in the United States: 1880–2005. Wea. Forecasting, 22, 1214–1228.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Balluz, L., Schieve L. , Holmes T. , Kiezak S. , and Malilay J. , 2000: Predictors for people’s response to a tornado warning, Arkansas, March 1, 1997. Disasters, 24, 71–77.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Bieringer, P., and Ray P. S. , 1996: A comparison of tornado warning lead times with and without NEXRAD Doppler radar. Wea. Forecasting, 11, 47–52.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Brooks, H. E., cited 2010: Severe thunderstorm climatology. [Available online at http://www.nssl.noaa.gov/hazard/.]

  • Brooks, H. E., Doswell C. A. III, and Kay M. P. , 2003: Climatological estimates of local daily tornado probability for the United States. Wea. Forecasting, 18, 626–640.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Donner, W. R., 2007: The political ecology of disaster: An analysis of factors influencing U.S. tornado fatalities and injuries, 1998–2000. Demography, 44, 669–685.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Doswell, C. A., cited 1999: Are warning lead times the most important issue in tornado events? WeatherZine, Center for Science and Technology Policy Research, Boulder, CO, No. 17. [Available online at http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/zine/archives/1-29/17/editorial.html.]

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Doswell, C. A., Moller A. R. , and Brooks H. E. , 1999: Storm spotting and public awareness since the first tornado forecasts of 1948. Wea. Forecasting, 14, 544–557.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Erickson, S., and Brooks H. , 2006: Lead time and time under tornado warnings: 1986–2004. Extended Abstracts, 23rd Conf. on Severe Local Storms, St. Louis, MO, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 11.5. [Available online at http://ams.confex.com/ams/23SLS/techprogram/paper_115194.htm.]

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Ewald, R., and Guyer G. L. , 2002: The ideal lead time for tornado warnings—A look from the customer’s perspective. Extended Abstracts, 21st Conf. on Severe Local Storms, San Antonio TX, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 7.4. [Available online at http://ams.confex.com/ams/SLS_WAF_NWP/techprogram/paper_47592.htm.]

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Golden, J. H., and Adams C. R. , 2000: The tornado problem: Forecast, warning, and response. Nat. Hazards Rev., 1 (2), 107–118.

  • Hammer, B., and Schmidlin T. W. , 2002: Response to warnings during the 3 May 1999 Oklahoma City tornado: Reasons and relative injury rates. Wea. Forecasting, 17, 577–581.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Kahneman, D., and Tversky A. , 1979: Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263–291.

  • NWS, cited 2010: Weather fatality, injury, and damage statistics. [Available online at http://www.weather.gov/os/hazstats.shtm.]

  • Riad, J. K., Norris F. H. , and Ruback R. B. , 1999: Predicting evacuation in two major disasters: Risk perception, social influence, and access to resources. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol., 29, 918–934.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Schmidt, M., cited 2004: Investigating risk perception: A short introduction. [Available online at http://www.markusschmidt.eu/pdf/Intro_risk_perception_Schmidt.pdf.]

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Simmons, K. M., and Sutter D. , 2006: Improvements in tornado warnings and tornado casualties. Int. J. Mass Emerg. Disasters, 23, 351–369.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Simmons, K. M., and Sutter D. , 2008: Tornado warnings, lead times, and tornado casualties: An empirical investigation. Wea. Forecasting, 23, 246–258.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • Sims, J. H., and Baumann D. D. , 1972: The tornado threat: Coping styles of the north and south. Science, 176, 1386–1392.

  • Slovic, P., 1987: Perception of risk. Science, 236, 280–285.

  • Sorensen, J. H., 2000: Hazard warning systems: Review of 20 years of progress. Nat. Hazards Rev., 1, 119–125.

  • Stensrud, D. J., and Coauthors, 2009: Convective-scale warn-on-forecast: A vision for 2020. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 90, 1487–1499.

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 1365 392 21
PDF Downloads 828 216 14