Tornado Warning Trade-Offs: Evaluating Choices for Visually Communicating Risk

Abstract

Recent improvements in weather observation and monitoring have increased the precision of tornado warnings. The National Weather Service currently issues storm-based tornado warnings, and even more geographically specific warnings that include probability information are under development. At the same time, the widespread proliferation of smartphone and mobile computing technology supports the rapid dissemination of graphical weather warning information. Some broadcasters and private companies have already begun using probabilistic-style tornado warning graphics. However, the development of these new types of warnings has occurred with limited research on how users interpret probabilistic visualizations. This study begins filling this void by examining responses to color scheme and relative position using probabilistic tornado warning designs. A survey of university students is used to measure the level of perceived fear and likelihood of protective action for a series of hypothetical warning scenarios. Central research questions investigate 1) differences in responses across warning designs, 2) clustering of extreme responses in each design, 3) trends in responses with respect to probability levels, 4) differences in responses inside versus outside the warnings, and 5) differences in responses near the edges of the warning designs. Results suggest a variety of trade-offs in viewer responses to tornado warnings based on visual design choices. These findings underscore the need for more comprehensive research on visualizations in weather hazard communication that can aid meteorologists in effectively warning the public and spur appropriate tornado protection behaviors in a timely manner.

Designing environmental uncertainty information for experts and non‐experts: Does data presentation affect users’ decisions and interpretations?

“…The amount of uncertainty inferred was equal between the fan plot and worded probability at 50%. This result suggests that, similar to previous literature with more familiar natural‐hazard forecasts (e.g., tornado, temperature, hurricane; Ash et al ., ; Ruginski et al ., ; Tak et al ., ), interpretations of forecast information can be different when given different forecast representations for an unfamiliar hazard. Interpreting uncertainty differently depending on differing forecast representations could be problematic in real‐life decision‐making situations; for example, increasing coastal protection as an adaption to sea‐level rise.…”

Decision Science Perspectives on Hurricane Vulnerability: Evidence from the 2010–2012 Atlantic Hurricane Seasons

“…The findings from two lab-based studies by Wu et al [37,38] support the finding that people tend to focus on the forecast track, gleaning little information from the rest of the graphic. Other challenges with maps include confusion between probability maps and scenario maps [39] and misjudgment of risk when polygons are used to show risk zones [40,41]. Although people at least sometimes are able to infer that the edge of a polygon does not indicate a divide between an area at risk and an area completely not at risk [38,41], there is some evidence that people infer a higher risk at the center of the polygon [41].…”

More Than Meets the Eye: Volcanic Hazard Map Design and Visual Communication

“…For example, researchers have found that visual design of wildfire hazard maps can influence people's interest and engagement with the hazard information and also how they use it to make decisions about evacuation (Cao et al 2016;Cheong et al 2016). Similarly, visual design has been found to influence emotional and behavioural responses to tornado warning maps (Ash et al 2014). Visualising and communicating uncertainty in geospatial data also remains an ongoing challenge across many different fields (Aerts et al 2003;Spiegelhalter et al 2011;Kinkeldey et al 2014).…”