Communicating Uncertainty in Weather Forecasts: A Survey of the U.S. Public

Rebecca E. Morss National Center for Atmospheric Research, * Boulder, Colorado

Search for other papers by Rebecca E. Morss in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Julie L. Demuth National Center for Atmospheric Research, * Boulder, Colorado

Search for other papers by Julie L. Demuth in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Jeffrey K. Lazo National Center for Atmospheric Research, * Boulder, Colorado

Search for other papers by Jeffrey K. Lazo in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Abstract

Weather forecasts are inherently uncertain, and meteorologists have information about weather forecast uncertainty that is not readily available to most forecast users. Yet effectively communicating forecast uncertainty to nonmeteorologists remains challenging. Improving forecast uncertainty communication requires research-based knowledge that can inform decisions on what uncertainty information to communicate, when, and how to do so. To help build such knowledge, this article explores the public’s perspectives on everyday weather forecast uncertainty and uncertainty information using results from a nationwide survey. By contributing to the fundamental understanding of laypeople’s views on forecast uncertainty, the findings can inform both uncertainty communication and related research.

The article uses empirical data from a nationwide survey of the U.S. public to investigate beliefs commonly held among meteorologists and to explore new topics. The results show that when given a deterministic temperature forecast, most respondents expected the temperature to fall within a range around the predicted value. In other words, most people inferred uncertainty into the deterministic forecast. People’s preferences for deterministic versus nondeterministic forecasts were examined in two situations; in both, a significant majority of respondents liked weather forecasts that expressed uncertainty, and many preferred such forecasts to single-valued forecasts. The article also discusses people’s confidence in different types of forecasts, their interpretations of the probability of precipitation forecasts, and their preferences for how forecast uncertainty is conveyed. Further empirical research is needed to study the article’s findings in other contexts and to continue exploring perception, interpretation, communication, and use of weather forecast uncertainty.

* The National Center for Atmospheric Research is sponsored by the National Science Foundation

Corresponding author address: Rebecca E. Morss, NCAR/MMM/ISSE, P.O. Box 3000, Boulder, CO 80307-3000. Email: morss@ucar.edu

Abstract

Weather forecasts are inherently uncertain, and meteorologists have information about weather forecast uncertainty that is not readily available to most forecast users. Yet effectively communicating forecast uncertainty to nonmeteorologists remains challenging. Improving forecast uncertainty communication requires research-based knowledge that can inform decisions on what uncertainty information to communicate, when, and how to do so. To help build such knowledge, this article explores the public’s perspectives on everyday weather forecast uncertainty and uncertainty information using results from a nationwide survey. By contributing to the fundamental understanding of laypeople’s views on forecast uncertainty, the findings can inform both uncertainty communication and related research.

The article uses empirical data from a nationwide survey of the U.S. public to investigate beliefs commonly held among meteorologists and to explore new topics. The results show that when given a deterministic temperature forecast, most respondents expected the temperature to fall within a range around the predicted value. In other words, most people inferred uncertainty into the deterministic forecast. People’s preferences for deterministic versus nondeterministic forecasts were examined in two situations; in both, a significant majority of respondents liked weather forecasts that expressed uncertainty, and many preferred such forecasts to single-valued forecasts. The article also discusses people’s confidence in different types of forecasts, their interpretations of the probability of precipitation forecasts, and their preferences for how forecast uncertainty is conveyed. Further empirical research is needed to study the article’s findings in other contexts and to continue exploring perception, interpretation, communication, and use of weather forecast uncertainty.

* The National Center for Atmospheric Research is sponsored by the National Science Foundation

Corresponding author address: Rebecca E. Morss, NCAR/MMM/ISSE, P.O. Box 3000, Boulder, CO 80307-3000. Email: morss@ucar.edu

Save
  • AMS, 2002: Enhancing weather information with probability forecasts. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 83 , 450452.

  • Baker, E. J., 1995: Public response to hurricane probability forecasts. Prof. Geogr., 47 , 137147.

  • Ban, R., 2007: Moving towards symbiosis between physical and social sciences. Wea. Soc. Watch, 1 , 3. 1, 11.

  • Broad, K., Leiserowitz A. , Weinkle J. , and Steketee M. , 2007: Misinterpretations of the “cone of uncertainty” in Florida during the 2004 hurricane season. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 88 , 651667.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • CFI Group, 2005: National Weather Service customer satisfaction survey: General public. Report to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 154 pp. [Available online at http://www.nws.noaa.gov/com/files/NWS_Public_survey050608.pdf.].

  • Couper, M. P., 2001: Web surveys: A review of issues and approaches. Public Opinion Quart., 64 , 464494.

  • Dillman, D. A., 2000: Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. 2d ed. John Wiley and Sons, 464 pp.

  • Ericsson, K. A., and Simon H. A. , 1993: Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. Rev. ed. The MIT Press, 443 pp.

  • Fischhoff, B., 1994: What forecasts (seem to) mean. Int. J. Forecasting, 10 , 387403.

  • Fischhoff, B., 1995: Risk perception and communication unplugged: Twenty years of process. Risk Anal., 15 , 137145.

  • Friedman, S. M., Rogers C. L. , and Dunwoody S. , 1999: Communicating Uncertainty: Media Coverage of New and Controversial Science. Lawrence Erlbaum, 350 pp.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gigerenzer, G., and Hoffrage U. , 1995: How to improve Bayesian reasoning without instruction: Frequency formats. Psychol. Rev., 102 , 684704.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gigerenzer, G., Hertwig R. , van den Broek E. , Fasolo B. , and Katsikopoulos K. V. , 2005: A 30% chance of rain tomorrow: How does the public understand probabilistic weather forecasts? Risk Anal., 25 , 623629.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hartmann, H. C., Pagano T. C. , Sorooshian S. , and Bales R. , 2002: Confidence builders: Evaluating seasonal climate forecasts from user perspectives. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 83 , 683698.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ibrekk, H., and Morgan M. G. , 1987: Graphical communication of uncertain quantities to nontechnical people. Risk Anal., 7 , 519529.

  • Jardine, C. G., and Hrudey S. E. , 1997: Mixed messages in risk communication. Risk Anal., 17 , 489498.

  • Joslyn, S., Pak K. , Jones D. , Pyles J. , and Hunt E. , 2007: The effect of probabilistic information on threshold forecasts. Wea. Forecasting, 22 , 804812.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kahneman, D., Slovic P. , and Tversky A. , 1982: Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge University Press, 555 pp.

  • Lazo, J. K., Morss R. E. , and Demuth J. , 2008: 300 billion served: Households’ sources, perceptions, uses, and values for weather forecast information. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., submitted.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Marx, S. M., Weber E. U. , Orlove B. S. , Leiserowitz A. , Krantz D. H. , Roncoli C. , and Phillips J. , 2007: Communication and mental processes: Experiential and analytic processing of uncertain climate information. Global Environ. Change, 17 , 4758.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Morgan, M. G., Fischhoff B. , Bostrom A. , and Atman C. J. , 2002: Risk Communication: A Mental Models Approach. Cambridge University Press, 366 pp.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Morss, R. E., Wilhelmi O. V. , Downton M. W. , and Gruntfest E. , 2005: Flood risk, uncertainty, and scientific information for decision-making: Lessons from an interdisciplinary project. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 86 , 15931601.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Morss, R. E., Lazo J. K. , Brown B. G. , Brooks H. E. , Ganderton P. T. , and Mills B. N. , 2008: Societal and economic research and applications for weather forecasts: Priorities for the North American THORPEX program. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 89 , 335346.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Moss, R. H., and Schneider S. H. , 2000: Uncertainties in the IPCC TAR: Recommendations to lead authors for more consistent assessment reporting. Guidance Papers on the Cross Cutting Issues of the Third Assessment Report, R. Pachauri, T. Taniguchi, and K. Tanaka, Eds., World Meteorological Organization, 33–51.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Murphy, A. H., 1998: The early history of probability forecasts: Some extensions and clarifications. Wea. Forecasting, 13 , 515.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Murphy, A. H., and Winkler R. L. , 1974: Probability forecasts: A survey of National Weather Service forecasters. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 55 , 14491452.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Murphy, A. H., and Brown B. G. , 1984: A comparative evaluation of objective and subjective weather forecasts in the United States. J. Forecasting, 3 , 369393.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Murphy, A. H., Lichtenstein S. , Fischoff B. , and Winkler R. L. , 1980: Misinterpretations of precipitation probability forecasts. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 61 , 695701.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • NRC, 2003: Communicating Uncertainties in Weather and Climate Information: A Workshop Summary. National Academies Press, 68 pp.

  • NRC, 2006: Completing the Forecast: Characterizing and Communicating Uncertainty for Better Decisions Using Weather and Climate Forecasts. National Academies Press, 124 pp.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • NWS, 2005: WFO public weather forecast products specification. National Weather Service Instruction 10-503, 75 pp. [Available online at http://www.nws.noaa.gov/directives/010/pd01005003b.pdf.].

  • Oppenheimer, M., and Todorov A. , 2006: Global warming: The psychology of long term risk. Climatic Change, 77 , 16.

  • Patt, A., 2001: Understanding uncertainty: Forecasting seasonal climate for farmers in Zimbabwe. Risk Decision Policy, 6 , 105119.

  • Patt, A., and Schrag D. P. , 2003: Using specific language to describe risk and probability. Climatic Change, 61 , 1730.

  • Phillips, J., 2001: Proceedings of the Workshop on Communication of Climate Forecast Information. IRI-CW/01/4, International Research Institute for Climate Prediction and Society, Palisades, NY, 74 pp.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Pulwarty, R. S., and Redmond K. T. , 1997: Climate and salmon restoration in the Columbia River basin: The role and usability of seasonal forecasts. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 78 , 381397.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Roulston, M. S., Bolton G. E. , Kleit A. N. , and Sears-Collins A. L. , 2006: A laboratory study of the benefits of including uncertainty information in weather forecasts. Wea. Forecasting, 21 , 116122.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Saviers, A. M., and van Bussum L. J. , 1997: Juneau public questionnaire: Results, analysis, and conclusions. NOAA Tech. Memo. NWS AR-44. [Available online at http://pajk.arh.noaa.gov/info/articles/survey/intro.htm.].

  • Schuman, H., and Presser S. , 1996: Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys: Experiments on Question Form, Wording, and Context. Sage Publications, 372 pp.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sink, S. A., 1995: Determining the public’s understanding of precipitation forecasts: Results of a survey. Natl. Wea. Dig., 19 , 3. 915.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Stewart, A. E., 2006: Assessing the human experience of weather and climate: A further examination of weather salience. Preprints. Environmental Risk and Impacts on Society: Benefits and Challenges, Atlanta, GA, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 1.6. [Available online at http://ams.confex.com/ams/pdfpapers/101916.pdf.].

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Tourangeau, R., Rips L. J. , and Rasinski K. , 2000: The Psychology of Survey Response. Cambridge University Press, 415 pp.

  • U.S. Census Bureau, cited. 2007a: 2006 American community survey. [Available online at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/.].

  • U.S. Census Bureau, cited. 2007b: Computer and Internet use in the United States: 2003. [Available online at http://www.census.gov/prod/2005pubs/p23-208.pdf.].

  • Vislocky, R. L., Fritsch J. M. , and DiRienzo S. N. , 1995: Operational omission and misuse of precipitation probability forecasts. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 76 , 4952.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Wallsten, T. S., Budescu D. V. , Rapoport A. , Zwick R. , and Forsyth B. , 1986: Measuring the vague meanings of probability terms. J. Experimental Psychol., 115 , 348365.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 4135 1142 132
PDF Downloads 3055 710 59