Comments

Brooks, Harold E.; Doswell, Charles A.; Sutter, Daniel

doi:10.1175/bams-89-1-87

“…Yes, when warnings include information about the potential consequences of a storm, increasing the projected impact of a warned storm increased the probability that our respondents selected some sort of protective action. Though estimates differ, most researchers agree that the risk of death or injury from a tornado is significantly higher in stationary vehicles than permanent structures, like single-family homes (Hammer and Schmidlin 2000;Schmidlin et al 2002;Wurman et al 2007;Brooks et al 2008). To explain this phenomenon, we showed that the relationship between consequence-based messaging and protective action depends (in part) on the type of action being considered.…”

Section: Discussion and Implications Discussion Of Findingsmentioning

confidence: 90%

The Influence of Consequence-Based Messages on Public Responses to Tornado Warnings

Ripberger

¹

,

Silva

²

,

Jenkins‐Smith

³

et al. 2015

Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Central Region Headquarters of the National Weather Service (NWS) recently launched an experimental product that supplements traditional tornado and severe thunderstorm warning products with information about the potential impact of warned storms. As yet, however, we know relatively little about the influence of consequence-based messages on warning responsiveness. To address this gap, we fielded two surveys of U.S. residents that live in tornado-prone regions of the country. Both surveys contained an experiment wherein participants were randomly assigned a consequence-based tornado warning message and asked to indicate how they would respond if they were to receive such a warning. Respondents that were assigned to higher-impact categories were more likely choose protective action than respondents assigned to lower-impact categories. There was, however, a threshold beyond which escalating the projected consequences of the storm no longer increased the probability of protective action. To account for this, we show that the relationship between consequence-based messages and protective action depends on the type of action being considered. At lower levels of projected impact, increasing the expected consequences of the storm simultaneously increased the probability that respondents selected a “shelter in place” or “leave residence” option. At higher levels of projected impact, this relationship changed—increasing the projected consequences of the storm decreased the probability that respondents would shelter in place and increased the probability that they would leave their residence for what they perceived to be a safer location. In some severe storm situations, this behavior may increase rather than decrease the risks.

show abstract

“…Put another way, how many injuries and deaths occur in casualty-producing tornadoes given an estimated number of people and housing units within the tornado damage path. Previous research (Eidson et al, 1990;Legates and Biddle, 1999;Daley et al, 2005;Brooks et al, 2008;Corfidi et al, 2010;Kuligowski et al, 2013) has focused on case studies to gain insight into the number or rate of tornado injuries and fatalities. For instance, Brooks et al (2008) synthesized results from previous studies to show that, historically, tornado fatality rates have ranged from 0.1% within the 3 May, 1999 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma EF5 tornado (Daley et al, 2005) to 1.0% in the 8 April, 1998 Birmingham, Alabama EF4 tornado (Legates and Biddle, 1999).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous research (Eidson et al, 1990;Legates and Biddle, 1999;Daley et al, 2005;Brooks et al, 2008;Corfidi et al, 2010;Kuligowski et al, 2013) has focused on case studies to gain insight into the number or rate of tornado injuries and fatalities. For instance, Brooks et al (2008) synthesized results from previous studies to show that, historically, tornado fatality rates have ranged from 0.1% within the 3 May, 1999 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma EF5 tornado (Daley et al, 2005) to 1.0% in the 8 April, 1998 Birmingham, Alabama EF4 tornado (Legates and Biddle, 1999). Regarding injuries, Eidson et al (1990), Brown et al (2002, and Corfidi et al (2010) find a ratio between the number of tornado fatalities and tornado injuries to be approximately 16, 15, and 17 injuries for each fatality, respectively, while Kuligowski et al (2013) finds a ratio of approximately 6 injuries for each fatality.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, Antonescu et al (2018) rearrange tornadoes from the historical 24-25 June, 1967 European outbreak to estimate what the event might look like if it occurred today. Using fatality rates ranging from 0.1% to 1.0% (Legates and Biddle, 1999;Daley et al, 2005;Brooks et al, 2008), and injury rates of 15 injuries per fatality, they find the same outbreak-were it to happen today-could result in the destruction of over 24,000 buildings, and produce 25-2,580 injuries, as well as 17-172 fatalities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluating tornado casualty rates in the United States

Fricker

¹

2020

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tornadoes account for nearly one fifth of all natural hazard fatalities in the United States, yet there exist no general estimates of casualty rates across the country. Here tornado casualty rates are estimated for all casualty-producing tornadoes over the period 1995-2016 using tornado level information related to the population and total housing units within each damage path. The 22-year United States per-capita casualty rate is 2.3%, while the 22-year United States per-housing unit casualty rate is 5.4%. Injury and fatality rates are also estimated over the same period. The 22-year United States per-capita fatality rate is .15% and the per-capita injury rate is 2.1%. The per-housing unit fatality rate is .36% and the per-housing unit injury rate is 5.1%. Casualty rates are further examined through subsets of Enhanced Fujita rating, state boundaries, and county boundaries. When used in conjunction with estimates of future changes in tornado behavior and population growth, these casualty rates can help predict tornado casualty events in communities throughout the United States.

show abstract

“…Put another way, how many injuries and deaths occur in casualty-producing tornadoes given an estimated number of people and housing units within the tornado damage path. Previous research (Eidson et al, 1990;Legates and Biddle, 1999;Daley et al, 2005;Brooks et al, 2008;Corfidi et al, 2010;Kuligowski et al, 2013) has focused on case studies to gain insight into the number or rate of tornado injuries and fatalities. For instance, Brooks et al (2008) synthesized results from previous studies to show that, historically, tornado fatality rates have ranged from 0.1% within the 3 May, 1999 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma EF5 tornado (Daley et al, 2005) to 1.0% in the 8 April, 1998 Birmingham, Alabama EF4 tornado (Legates and Biddle, 1999).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating tornado casualty rates in the United States

Fricker¹

2019

Preprint

1

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tornadoes account for nearly one fifth of all natural hazard fatalities in the United States, yet there exist no general estimates of casualty rates across the country. Here tornado casualty rates are estimated for all casualty-producing tornadoes over the period 1995-2016 using tornado level information related to the population and total housing units within each damage path. The 22-year United States per-capita casualty rate is 2.3%, while the 22-year United States per-housing unit casualty rate is 5.4%. Injury and fatality rates are also estimated over the same period. The 22-year United States per-capita fatality rate is .15% and the per-capita injury rate is 2.1%. The per-housing unit fatality rate is .36% and the per-housing unit injury rate is 5.1%. Casualty rates are further examined through subsets of Enhanced Fujita rating, state boundaries, and county boundaries. When used in conjunction with estimates of future changes in tornado behavior and population growth, these casualty rates can help predict tornado casualty events in communities throughout the United States.

show abstract

Comments

Cited by 6 publications

References 9 publications

The Influence of Consequence-Based Messages on Public Responses to Tornado Warnings

The Influence of Consequence-Based Messages on Public Responses to Tornado Warnings

Evaluating tornado casualty rates in the United States

Evaluating tornado casualty rates in the United States

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About