An Interdisciplinary Approach to Evaluate Public Comprehension of the “Cone of Uncertainty” Graphic

The accurate interpretation of hurricane risk graphics is expected to benefit public decision-making. To investigate public interpretation and suggest improvements to graphical designs, an interdisciplinary, mixed-methods approach is being undertaken. Drawing on a series of focus groups with Miami r...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 2022-10, Vol.103 (10), p.E2214-E2221
Hauptverfasser: Evans, Scotney D., Broad, Kenneth, Cairo, Alberto, Majumdar, Sharanya J., McNoldy, Brian D., Millet, Barbara, Rauk, Leigh
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page E2221
container_issue 10
container_start_page E2214
container_title Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society
container_volume 103
creator Evans, Scotney D.
Broad, Kenneth
Cairo, Alberto
Majumdar, Sharanya J.
McNoldy, Brian D.
Millet, Barbara
Rauk, Leigh
description The accurate interpretation of hurricane risk graphics is expected to benefit public decision-making. To investigate public interpretation and suggest improvements to graphical designs, an interdisciplinary, mixed-methods approach is being undertaken. Drawing on a series of focus groups with Miami residents that focused on understanding interpretations of the National Hurricane Center’s (NHC) track forecast cone or “Cone of Uncertainty,” we developed an online survey targeting a much larger sample of Florida residents (n = 2,847). The findings from this survey are the primary focus of this short article. We attempt to answer three questions: 1) What are the most frequent and trusted sources of information that Florida residents use when they learn that a hurricane is coming their way? 2) How accurately are Florida residents able to interpret risk based on the NHC Cone of Uncertainty graphic? 3) What is the relationship, if any, between the number of correct interpretations and income, age, education, housing location, housing type, or “most trusted” sources of information? Unlike previous public surveys that focused more on evacuation decisions, forecast usage, and perception of hurricane risk, our approach specifically pays attention to the details of design elements of the forecast graphics with the long-term goal of minimizing misinterpretation of future graphics. Our analysis suggests that many residents have difficulty interpreting several aspects, suggesting a rethink on how to graphically communicate aspects such as uncertainty, the size of the storm, areas of likely damage, watches and warnings, and wind intensity categories. Graphical communication strategies need to be revised to better support the different ways in which people understand forecast products, and these strategies should be tested for validity in real world settings.
doi_str_mv 10.1175/BAMS-D-21-0250.1
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2806975318</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>27283472</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>27283472</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c223t-2b906a20ac534aab82cc158b6371a8813f4a32887d81fb1fa07aa42523184c483</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kM9KAzEQxoMoWKt3L0LA82r-7DbpcW1rLVQUtOeQTbNuyjZZk6zQWx9EX65P4i4VLzPM8Ptm-D4ArjG6w5hl9w_581syTQhOEMm63QkY4IygBKWMnYIBQogmXWHn4CKETT9SjgfgI7dwYaP2axOUaWpjpd_BvGm8k6qC0cHZl6xbGTV8bYvaKDhx28brSttgnIWuhLHS8LD_njir-3FllfZRGht3h_0PnHvZVEZdgrNS1kFf_fUhWD3O3idPyfJlvpjky0QRQmNCijEaSYKkymgqZcGJUjjjxYgyLDnHtEwlJZyzNcdlgUuJmJQpyQjFPFUpp0Nwe7zbGfhsdYhi41pvu5eCcDQas6wjOwodKeVdCF6XovFm2zkXGIk-TtHHKaaCYNHHKXAnuTlKNiE6_88TRjhNGaG_-CVzeg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2806975318</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>An Interdisciplinary Approach to Evaluate Public Comprehension of the “Cone of Uncertainty” Graphic</title><source>American Meteorological Society</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Evans, Scotney D. ; Broad, Kenneth ; Cairo, Alberto ; Majumdar, Sharanya J. ; McNoldy, Brian D. ; Millet, Barbara ; Rauk, Leigh</creator><creatorcontrib>Evans, Scotney D. ; Broad, Kenneth ; Cairo, Alberto ; Majumdar, Sharanya J. ; McNoldy, Brian D. ; Millet, Barbara ; Rauk, Leigh</creatorcontrib><description>The accurate interpretation of hurricane risk graphics is expected to benefit public decision-making. To investigate public interpretation and suggest improvements to graphical designs, an interdisciplinary, mixed-methods approach is being undertaken. Drawing on a series of focus groups with Miami residents that focused on understanding interpretations of the National Hurricane Center’s (NHC) track forecast cone or “Cone of Uncertainty,” we developed an online survey targeting a much larger sample of Florida residents (n = 2,847). The findings from this survey are the primary focus of this short article. We attempt to answer three questions: 1) What are the most frequent and trusted sources of information that Florida residents use when they learn that a hurricane is coming their way? 2) How accurately are Florida residents able to interpret risk based on the NHC Cone of Uncertainty graphic? 3) What is the relationship, if any, between the number of correct interpretations and income, age, education, housing location, housing type, or “most trusted” sources of information? Unlike previous public surveys that focused more on evacuation decisions, forecast usage, and perception of hurricane risk, our approach specifically pays attention to the details of design elements of the forecast graphics with the long-term goal of minimizing misinterpretation of future graphics. Our analysis suggests that many residents have difficulty interpreting several aspects, suggesting a rethink on how to graphically communicate aspects such as uncertainty, the size of the storm, areas of likely damage, watches and warnings, and wind intensity categories. Graphical communication strategies need to be revised to better support the different ways in which people understand forecast products, and these strategies should be tested for validity in real world settings.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-0007</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1520-0477</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1175/BAMS-D-21-0250.1</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Boston: American Meteorological Society</publisher><subject>Communication ; Decision making ; Focus groups ; Graphics ; Housing ; Hurricane tracking ; Hurricanes ; In Box ; Information sources ; Residential location ; Risk perception ; Social networks ; Storms ; Surveys ; Uncertainty</subject><ispartof>Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 2022-10, Vol.103 (10), p.E2214-E2221</ispartof><rights>2022 American Meteorological Society</rights><rights>Copyright American Meteorological Society 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c223t-2b906a20ac534aab82cc158b6371a8813f4a32887d81fb1fa07aa42523184c483</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,3670,27907,27908</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Evans, Scotney D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Broad, Kenneth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cairo, Alberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Majumdar, Sharanya J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McNoldy, Brian D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Millet, Barbara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rauk, Leigh</creatorcontrib><title>An Interdisciplinary Approach to Evaluate Public Comprehension of the “Cone of Uncertainty” Graphic</title><title>Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society</title><description>The accurate interpretation of hurricane risk graphics is expected to benefit public decision-making. To investigate public interpretation and suggest improvements to graphical designs, an interdisciplinary, mixed-methods approach is being undertaken. Drawing on a series of focus groups with Miami residents that focused on understanding interpretations of the National Hurricane Center’s (NHC) track forecast cone or “Cone of Uncertainty,” we developed an online survey targeting a much larger sample of Florida residents (n = 2,847). The findings from this survey are the primary focus of this short article. We attempt to answer three questions: 1) What are the most frequent and trusted sources of information that Florida residents use when they learn that a hurricane is coming their way? 2) How accurately are Florida residents able to interpret risk based on the NHC Cone of Uncertainty graphic? 3) What is the relationship, if any, between the number of correct interpretations and income, age, education, housing location, housing type, or “most trusted” sources of information? Unlike previous public surveys that focused more on evacuation decisions, forecast usage, and perception of hurricane risk, our approach specifically pays attention to the details of design elements of the forecast graphics with the long-term goal of minimizing misinterpretation of future graphics. Our analysis suggests that many residents have difficulty interpreting several aspects, suggesting a rethink on how to graphically communicate aspects such as uncertainty, the size of the storm, areas of likely damage, watches and warnings, and wind intensity categories. Graphical communication strategies need to be revised to better support the different ways in which people understand forecast products, and these strategies should be tested for validity in real world settings.</description><subject>Communication</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Focus groups</subject><subject>Graphics</subject><subject>Housing</subject><subject>Hurricane tracking</subject><subject>Hurricanes</subject><subject>In Box</subject><subject>Information sources</subject><subject>Residential location</subject><subject>Risk perception</subject><subject>Social networks</subject><subject>Storms</subject><subject>Surveys</subject><subject>Uncertainty</subject><issn>0003-0007</issn><issn>1520-0477</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNo9kM9KAzEQxoMoWKt3L0LA82r-7DbpcW1rLVQUtOeQTbNuyjZZk6zQWx9EX65P4i4VLzPM8Ptm-D4ArjG6w5hl9w_581syTQhOEMm63QkY4IygBKWMnYIBQogmXWHn4CKETT9SjgfgI7dwYaP2axOUaWpjpd_BvGm8k6qC0cHZl6xbGTV8bYvaKDhx28brSttgnIWuhLHS8LD_njir-3FllfZRGht3h_0PnHvZVEZdgrNS1kFf_fUhWD3O3idPyfJlvpjky0QRQmNCijEaSYKkymgqZcGJUjjjxYgyLDnHtEwlJZyzNcdlgUuJmJQpyQjFPFUpp0Nwe7zbGfhsdYhi41pvu5eCcDQas6wjOwodKeVdCF6XovFm2zkXGIk-TtHHKaaCYNHHKXAnuTlKNiE6_88TRjhNGaG_-CVzeg</recordid><startdate>20221001</startdate><enddate>20221001</enddate><creator>Evans, Scotney D.</creator><creator>Broad, Kenneth</creator><creator>Cairo, Alberto</creator><creator>Majumdar, Sharanya J.</creator><creator>McNoldy, Brian D.</creator><creator>Millet, Barbara</creator><creator>Rauk, Leigh</creator><general>American Meteorological Society</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>R05</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20221001</creationdate><title>An Interdisciplinary Approach to Evaluate Public Comprehension of the “Cone of Uncertainty” Graphic</title><author>Evans, Scotney D. ; Broad, Kenneth ; Cairo, Alberto ; Majumdar, Sharanya J. ; McNoldy, Brian D. ; Millet, Barbara ; Rauk, Leigh</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c223t-2b906a20ac534aab82cc158b6371a8813f4a32887d81fb1fa07aa42523184c483</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Communication</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Focus groups</topic><topic>Graphics</topic><topic>Housing</topic><topic>Hurricane tracking</topic><topic>Hurricanes</topic><topic>In Box</topic><topic>Information sources</topic><topic>Residential location</topic><topic>Risk perception</topic><topic>Social networks</topic><topic>Storms</topic><topic>Surveys</topic><topic>Uncertainty</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Evans, Scotney D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Broad, Kenneth</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cairo, Alberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Majumdar, Sharanya J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McNoldy, Brian D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Millet, Barbara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rauk, Leigh</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy &amp; Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>University of Michigan</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Evans, Scotney D.</au><au>Broad, Kenneth</au><au>Cairo, Alberto</au><au>Majumdar, Sharanya J.</au><au>McNoldy, Brian D.</au><au>Millet, Barbara</au><au>Rauk, Leigh</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>An Interdisciplinary Approach to Evaluate Public Comprehension of the “Cone of Uncertainty” Graphic</atitle><jtitle>Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society</jtitle><date>2022-10-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>103</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>E2214</spage><epage>E2221</epage><pages>E2214-E2221</pages><issn>0003-0007</issn><eissn>1520-0477</eissn><abstract>The accurate interpretation of hurricane risk graphics is expected to benefit public decision-making. To investigate public interpretation and suggest improvements to graphical designs, an interdisciplinary, mixed-methods approach is being undertaken. Drawing on a series of focus groups with Miami residents that focused on understanding interpretations of the National Hurricane Center’s (NHC) track forecast cone or “Cone of Uncertainty,” we developed an online survey targeting a much larger sample of Florida residents (n = 2,847). The findings from this survey are the primary focus of this short article. We attempt to answer three questions: 1) What are the most frequent and trusted sources of information that Florida residents use when they learn that a hurricane is coming their way? 2) How accurately are Florida residents able to interpret risk based on the NHC Cone of Uncertainty graphic? 3) What is the relationship, if any, between the number of correct interpretations and income, age, education, housing location, housing type, or “most trusted” sources of information? Unlike previous public surveys that focused more on evacuation decisions, forecast usage, and perception of hurricane risk, our approach specifically pays attention to the details of design elements of the forecast graphics with the long-term goal of minimizing misinterpretation of future graphics. Our analysis suggests that many residents have difficulty interpreting several aspects, suggesting a rethink on how to graphically communicate aspects such as uncertainty, the size of the storm, areas of likely damage, watches and warnings, and wind intensity categories. Graphical communication strategies need to be revised to better support the different ways in which people understand forecast products, and these strategies should be tested for validity in real world settings.</abstract><cop>Boston</cop><pub>American Meteorological Society</pub><doi>10.1175/BAMS-D-21-0250.1</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0003-0007
ispartof Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 2022-10, Vol.103 (10), p.E2214-E2221
issn 0003-0007
1520-0477
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2806975318
source American Meteorological Society; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals
subjects Communication
Decision making
Focus groups
Graphics
Housing
Hurricane tracking
Hurricanes
In Box
Information sources
Residential location
Risk perception
Social networks
Storms
Surveys
Uncertainty
title An Interdisciplinary Approach to Evaluate Public Comprehension of the “Cone of Uncertainty” Graphic
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T18%3A22%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=An%20Interdisciplinary%20Approach%20to%20Evaluate%20Public%20Comprehension%20of%20the%20%E2%80%9CCone%20of%20Uncertainty%E2%80%9D%20Graphic&rft.jtitle=Bulletin%20of%20the%20American%20Meteorological%20Society&rft.au=Evans,%20Scotney%20D.&rft.date=2022-10-01&rft.volume=103&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=E2214&rft.epage=E2221&rft.pages=E2214-E2221&rft.issn=0003-0007&rft.eissn=1520-0477&rft_id=info:doi/10.1175/BAMS-D-21-0250.1&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E27283472%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2806975318&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=27283472&rfr_iscdi=true