The role of avalanche education in assessing and judging avalanche risk factors

Markus Landrø, R. Engeset, G. Pfuhl
{"title":"The role of avalanche education in assessing and judging avalanche risk factors","authors":"Markus Landrø, R. Engeset, G. Pfuhl","doi":"10.23865/jased.v6.2977","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Avalanche decision-making falls into two general categories; probabilistic approaches and analytical approaches. Analytical approaches have traditionally been considered applicable to experts only, as they require assessing risk factors precisely and understanding their relevance in each situation. In this study we question this assumption. We asked 1, 220 amateur backcountry recreationalists how relevant they rated and how precisely they could assess 11 avalanche risk factors. We investigated how their avalanche education and experience with avalanche incidents influenced their judgment of precision and relevance, and if avalanches become more predictable with more knowledge. Most recreationalists considered avalanches as predictable. These five factors were judged as highly relevant: signs of instability, distinguishing avalanche terrain from non-avalanche terrain, slope inclination, terrain traps, and distribution of weak layers. Relevance was independent of avalanche education and experience of incidents for all factors but danger level. Amateur recreationalists rated the relevance of the factors like that of experts. Rating of precision increased with more avalanche education, in particularly for these factors: distribution of the weak layers, terrain traps, avalanche size, recognizing avalanche terrain and stopping at safe spots. We recommend adopting an analytical approach for amateur backcountry recreationalists and discuss implications for avalanche forecasting and education.","PeriodicalId":403522,"journal":{"name":"Journal for Research in Arts and Sports Education","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for Research in Arts and Sports Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23865/jased.v6.2977","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Avalanche decision-making falls into two general categories; probabilistic approaches and analytical approaches. Analytical approaches have traditionally been considered applicable to experts only, as they require assessing risk factors precisely and understanding their relevance in each situation. In this study we question this assumption. We asked 1, 220 amateur backcountry recreationalists how relevant they rated and how precisely they could assess 11 avalanche risk factors. We investigated how their avalanche education and experience with avalanche incidents influenced their judgment of precision and relevance, and if avalanches become more predictable with more knowledge. Most recreationalists considered avalanches as predictable. These five factors were judged as highly relevant: signs of instability, distinguishing avalanche terrain from non-avalanche terrain, slope inclination, terrain traps, and distribution of weak layers. Relevance was independent of avalanche education and experience of incidents for all factors but danger level. Amateur recreationalists rated the relevance of the factors like that of experts. Rating of precision increased with more avalanche education, in particularly for these factors: distribution of the weak layers, terrain traps, avalanche size, recognizing avalanche terrain and stopping at safe spots. We recommend adopting an analytical approach for amateur backcountry recreationalists and discuss implications for avalanche forecasting and education.
雪崩教育在评估和判断雪崩危险因素中的作用
雪崩式决策分为两大类;概率方法和分析方法。传统上认为分析方法只适用于专家,因为它们需要准确地评估风险因素并了解它们在每种情况下的相关性。在这项研究中,我们质疑这一假设。我们询问了1220名业余野外娱乐爱好者,他们对11个雪崩危险因素的评估有多准确,以及他们对这些因素的相关性有多高。我们调查了他们的雪崩教育和雪崩事件经验如何影响他们对准确性和相关性的判断,以及雪崩是否随着知识的增加而变得更可预测。大多数休闲主义者认为雪崩是可以预测的。这五个因素被认为是高度相关的:不稳定的迹象、区分雪崩地形和非雪崩地形、斜坡倾角、地形陷阱和薄弱层的分布。除危险程度外,所有因素的相关性与雪崩教育和事故经验无关。业余的娱乐爱好者和专家一样,对这些因素的相关性进行了打分。随着雪崩教育的增加,精度等级也随之提高,特别是对于这些因素:薄弱层的分布、地形陷阱、雪崩规模、识别雪崩地形和在安全地点停下来。我们建议对业余野外休闲爱好者采用分析方法,并讨论雪崩预测和教育的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信