Search Results
You are looking at 1 - 7 of 7 items for
- Author or Editor: Sean Ernst x
- Refine by Access: All Content x
Abstract
While previous work has shown that the Storm Prediction Center (SPC) convective outlooks accurately capture meteorological outcomes, evidence suggests stakeholders and the public may misinterpret the categorical words currently used in the product. This work attempts to address this problem by investigating public reactions to alternative information formats that include the following numeric information: 1) numeric risk levels (i.e., “Level 2 of 5”) and 2) numeric probabilities (i.e., “a 5% chance”). In addition, it explores how different combinations of the categorical labels with numeric information may impact public reactions to the product. Survey data comes from the 2020 Severe Weather and Society Survey, a nationally representative survey of U.S. adults. Participants were shown varying combinations of the information formats of interest, and then rated their concern about the weather and the likelihood of changing plans in response to the given information. Results indicate that providing numeric information (in the form of levels or probabilities) increases the likelihood of participants correctly interpreting the convective outlook information relative to categorical labels alone. Including the categorical labels increases misinterpretation, regardless of whether numeric information was included alongside the labels. Finally, findings indicate participants’ numeracy (or their ability to understand and work with numbers) had an impact on correct interpretation of the order of the outlook labels. Although there are many challenges to correctly interpreting the SPC convective outlook, using only numeric labels instead of the current categorical labels may be a relatively straightforward change that could improve public interpretation of the product.
Significance Statement
The SPC convective outlook contains vital information that can help people prepare for a severe weather event. The categorical labels in this product are often ordered incorrectly by members of the public. This work shows using numeric levels or probabilities reduces the tendency for people to order the levels incorrectly.
Abstract
While previous work has shown that the Storm Prediction Center (SPC) convective outlooks accurately capture meteorological outcomes, evidence suggests stakeholders and the public may misinterpret the categorical words currently used in the product. This work attempts to address this problem by investigating public reactions to alternative information formats that include the following numeric information: 1) numeric risk levels (i.e., “Level 2 of 5”) and 2) numeric probabilities (i.e., “a 5% chance”). In addition, it explores how different combinations of the categorical labels with numeric information may impact public reactions to the product. Survey data comes from the 2020 Severe Weather and Society Survey, a nationally representative survey of U.S. adults. Participants were shown varying combinations of the information formats of interest, and then rated their concern about the weather and the likelihood of changing plans in response to the given information. Results indicate that providing numeric information (in the form of levels or probabilities) increases the likelihood of participants correctly interpreting the convective outlook information relative to categorical labels alone. Including the categorical labels increases misinterpretation, regardless of whether numeric information was included alongside the labels. Finally, findings indicate participants’ numeracy (or their ability to understand and work with numbers) had an impact on correct interpretation of the order of the outlook labels. Although there are many challenges to correctly interpreting the SPC convective outlook, using only numeric labels instead of the current categorical labels may be a relatively straightforward change that could improve public interpretation of the product.
Significance Statement
The SPC convective outlook contains vital information that can help people prepare for a severe weather event. The categorical labels in this product are often ordered incorrectly by members of the public. This work shows using numeric levels or probabilities reduces the tendency for people to order the levels incorrectly.
Abstract
As the abundance of weather forecast guidance continues to grow, communicators will have to prioritize what types of information to pass on to decision-makers. This work aims to evaluate how members of the public prioritize weather forecast attributes (including information about location, timing, chance, severity, impacts, and protective actions) on average and across event timelines in the severe, tropical, and winter weather domains. Data from three demographically representative surveys of U.S. adults indicate that members of the public generally prioritize information about event location, timing, and severity when evaluating the importance of forecast attributes. This pattern is largely consistent across hazard domains but varies across event timelines. In early stages of a forecast (such as the outlook time scale), people generally prioritize information about chance and location. In middle stages (watch time scale), event timing and severity become more important. In late stages (warning time scale), information about protective actions is a higher priority, especially for people with less exposure to a hazard.
Abstract
As the abundance of weather forecast guidance continues to grow, communicators will have to prioritize what types of information to pass on to decision-makers. This work aims to evaluate how members of the public prioritize weather forecast attributes (including information about location, timing, chance, severity, impacts, and protective actions) on average and across event timelines in the severe, tropical, and winter weather domains. Data from three demographically representative surveys of U.S. adults indicate that members of the public generally prioritize information about event location, timing, and severity when evaluating the importance of forecast attributes. This pattern is largely consistent across hazard domains but varies across event timelines. In early stages of a forecast (such as the outlook time scale), people generally prioritize information about chance and location. In middle stages (watch time scale), event timing and severity become more important. In late stages (warning time scale), information about protective actions is a higher priority, especially for people with less exposure to a hazard.
Abstract
Although severe weather forecast products, such as the Storm Prediction Center (SPC) convective outlook, are much more accurate than climatology at day-to-week time scales, tornadoes and severe thunderstorms claim dozens of lives and cause billions of dollars in damage every year. While the accuracy of this outlook has been well documented, less work has been done to explore the comprehension of the product by nonexpert users like the general public. This study seeks to fill this key knowledge gap by collecting data from a representative survey of U.S. adults in the lower 48 states about their use and interpretation of the SPC convective outlook. Participants in this study were asked to rank the words and colors used in the outlook from least to greatest risk, and their answers were compared through visualizations and statistical tests across multiple demographics. Results show that the U.S. public ranks the outlook colors similarly to their ordering in the outlook but switches the positions of several of the outlook words as compared to the operational product. Logistic regression models also reveal that more numerate individuals more correctly rank the SPC outlook words and colors. These findings suggest that the words used in the convective outlook may confuse nonexpert users, and that future work should continue to use input from public surveys to test potential improvements in the choice of outlook words. Using more easily understood words may help to increase the outlook’s decision support value and potentially reduce the harm caused by severe weather events.
Abstract
Although severe weather forecast products, such as the Storm Prediction Center (SPC) convective outlook, are much more accurate than climatology at day-to-week time scales, tornadoes and severe thunderstorms claim dozens of lives and cause billions of dollars in damage every year. While the accuracy of this outlook has been well documented, less work has been done to explore the comprehension of the product by nonexpert users like the general public. This study seeks to fill this key knowledge gap by collecting data from a representative survey of U.S. adults in the lower 48 states about their use and interpretation of the SPC convective outlook. Participants in this study were asked to rank the words and colors used in the outlook from least to greatest risk, and their answers were compared through visualizations and statistical tests across multiple demographics. Results show that the U.S. public ranks the outlook colors similarly to their ordering in the outlook but switches the positions of several of the outlook words as compared to the operational product. Logistic regression models also reveal that more numerate individuals more correctly rank the SPC outlook words and colors. These findings suggest that the words used in the convective outlook may confuse nonexpert users, and that future work should continue to use input from public surveys to test potential improvements in the choice of outlook words. Using more easily understood words may help to increase the outlook’s decision support value and potentially reduce the harm caused by severe weather events.
Abstract
Recent work has shown that the words used in the Storm Prediction Center’s convective outlook are not easily understood by members of the public. Furthermore, Spanish translations of the outlook information have also been shown to have interpretation challenges. This study uses survey data collected from the Severe Weather and Society Spanish Survey, a survey of Spanish speakers across the United States, to evaluate how U.S. residents receive, understand, and respond to weather forecasts and warnings. For this experiment, respondents were tasked with ranking the words and colors used in the SPC’s convective outlook. They were randomly assigned either 1) the words originally used by the SPC for Spanish translations or 2) a set of words suggested by linguistic experts familiar with Spanish dialects in the United States. We find Spanish speakers have similar challenges to English speakers when ordering the words the SPC uses. When using the translations proposed by the linguistic experts, we find the majority of Spanish speakers ranked the words in the intended order of associated risk. Spanish speakers also displayed similar ranking distributions for the colors in the outlook as English speakers, where both groups ranked red as the highest level of risk. These findings suggest the original translations used by the SPC convective outlook create barriers for Spanish speakers and that the expert translations more effectively communicate severe weather hazards to Spanish-speaking members of the public.
Significance Statement
The SPC’s convective outlook provides important information about the risk posed by severe storms to members of the public. While the SPC had official Spanish translations for the categorical labels used in the outlook, it was believed anecdotally that there was a disconnect between the words the SPC was using and the way the translated outlook was being interpreted by Spanish-speaking members of the public. This work verifies previous beliefs about the original translation set and confirms the reliability of a new set of translations developed by linguistic experts among Spanish-speaking members of the public.
Abstract
Recent work has shown that the words used in the Storm Prediction Center’s convective outlook are not easily understood by members of the public. Furthermore, Spanish translations of the outlook information have also been shown to have interpretation challenges. This study uses survey data collected from the Severe Weather and Society Spanish Survey, a survey of Spanish speakers across the United States, to evaluate how U.S. residents receive, understand, and respond to weather forecasts and warnings. For this experiment, respondents were tasked with ranking the words and colors used in the SPC’s convective outlook. They were randomly assigned either 1) the words originally used by the SPC for Spanish translations or 2) a set of words suggested by linguistic experts familiar with Spanish dialects in the United States. We find Spanish speakers have similar challenges to English speakers when ordering the words the SPC uses. When using the translations proposed by the linguistic experts, we find the majority of Spanish speakers ranked the words in the intended order of associated risk. Spanish speakers also displayed similar ranking distributions for the colors in the outlook as English speakers, where both groups ranked red as the highest level of risk. These findings suggest the original translations used by the SPC convective outlook create barriers for Spanish speakers and that the expert translations more effectively communicate severe weather hazards to Spanish-speaking members of the public.
Significance Statement
The SPC’s convective outlook provides important information about the risk posed by severe storms to members of the public. While the SPC had official Spanish translations for the categorical labels used in the outlook, it was believed anecdotally that there was a disconnect between the words the SPC was using and the way the translated outlook was being interpreted by Spanish-speaking members of the public. This work verifies previous beliefs about the original translation set and confirms the reliability of a new set of translations developed by linguistic experts among Spanish-speaking members of the public.
Abstract
Effective risk communication in the weather enterprise requires deep knowledge about the communities that enterprise members serve. This includes knowledge of the atmospheric and climate conditions in these communities as well as knowledge about the characteristics of the people living in these communities. Enterprise members often have access to data that facilitate the first type of knowledge, but relatively little social or behavioral data on the populations they serve. This article introduces an effort to overcome these challenges by developing a database of community statistics and an interactive platform that provides dynamic access to the database. Specific emphasis is given to one set of statistics in the community database: estimates of tornado warning reception, comprehension, and response by county warning area in the contiguous United States. Exploration of these estimates indicates significant variation in reception and comprehension across communities. This variation broadly aligns with tornado climatology, but there are noticeable differences within climatologically comparable regions that underline the importance of community-specific information. Verification of the estimates using independent observations from a random sample of communities confirms that the estimates are largely accurate, but there are a few consistent anomalies that prompt questions about why some communities exhibit higher or lower levels of reception, comprehension, and response than models suggest. The article concludes with a discussion of next steps and an invitation to use and contribute to the project as it progresses.
Abstract
Effective risk communication in the weather enterprise requires deep knowledge about the communities that enterprise members serve. This includes knowledge of the atmospheric and climate conditions in these communities as well as knowledge about the characteristics of the people living in these communities. Enterprise members often have access to data that facilitate the first type of knowledge, but relatively little social or behavioral data on the populations they serve. This article introduces an effort to overcome these challenges by developing a database of community statistics and an interactive platform that provides dynamic access to the database. Specific emphasis is given to one set of statistics in the community database: estimates of tornado warning reception, comprehension, and response by county warning area in the contiguous United States. Exploration of these estimates indicates significant variation in reception and comprehension across communities. This variation broadly aligns with tornado climatology, but there are noticeable differences within climatologically comparable regions that underline the importance of community-specific information. Verification of the estimates using independent observations from a random sample of communities confirms that the estimates are largely accurate, but there are a few consistent anomalies that prompt questions about why some communities exhibit higher or lower levels of reception, comprehension, and response than models suggest. The article concludes with a discussion of next steps and an invitation to use and contribute to the project as it progresses.
Abstract
Spanish-speaking populations in the United States are more vulnerable in disaster contexts due to inequities, such as language barriers, that prevent them from receiving life-saving information. For the past couple of decades, governmental organizations have addressed these issues by translating weather watches, warnings, and advisories into Spanish. Previous studies suggest that these Spanish translations do not communicate the same level of urgency as their English counterparts. To identify whether these translated products result in inequities between English and Spanish speaker reception and comprehension of forecast information, we asked a representative sample of U.S. English (n = 1,550) and Spanish (n = 1,050) speakers to correctly identify the translations of weather watches and warnings and found significant language inequities. Additionally, we asked U.S. Spanish speakers to indicate the urgency they felt when shown different Spanish words used in weather watch and warning translations. When presented with various translations for watch and warning terminology, respondents consistently rated aviso, the current translation of warning by the NWS and FEMA, as less urgent than many other alternatives. Additionally, the current translation of advisory, advertencia, communicated more urgency than both existing watch and warning translations in Spanish. To increase the effectiveness of severe weather messaging in multilingual contexts, translations should take into consideration factors such as culture and dialects of Spanish speakers in the United States and focus on translating the meaning, not the words, of key risk statements in weather products. We recommend vigilancia for “watch” and alerta for “warning” as research-supported terminologies to communicate urgency in Spanish.
Abstract
Spanish-speaking populations in the United States are more vulnerable in disaster contexts due to inequities, such as language barriers, that prevent them from receiving life-saving information. For the past couple of decades, governmental organizations have addressed these issues by translating weather watches, warnings, and advisories into Spanish. Previous studies suggest that these Spanish translations do not communicate the same level of urgency as their English counterparts. To identify whether these translated products result in inequities between English and Spanish speaker reception and comprehension of forecast information, we asked a representative sample of U.S. English (n = 1,550) and Spanish (n = 1,050) speakers to correctly identify the translations of weather watches and warnings and found significant language inequities. Additionally, we asked U.S. Spanish speakers to indicate the urgency they felt when shown different Spanish words used in weather watch and warning translations. When presented with various translations for watch and warning terminology, respondents consistently rated aviso, the current translation of warning by the NWS and FEMA, as less urgent than many other alternatives. Additionally, the current translation of advisory, advertencia, communicated more urgency than both existing watch and warning translations in Spanish. To increase the effectiveness of severe weather messaging in multilingual contexts, translations should take into consideration factors such as culture and dialects of Spanish speakers in the United States and focus on translating the meaning, not the words, of key risk statements in weather products. We recommend vigilancia for “watch” and alerta for “warning” as research-supported terminologies to communicate urgency in Spanish.
