Zoey Rosen, Makenzie J. Krocak, J. Ripberger, Rachael N. Cross, Emily D. Lenhardt, Carol L. Silva, H. Jenkins‐Smith
{"title":"飓风预报中的概率信息交流:预报员在社交媒体上使用的评估声明及其对公众可靠性评估的影响","authors":"Zoey Rosen, Makenzie J. Krocak, J. Ripberger, Rachael N. Cross, Emily D. Lenhardt, Carol L. Silva, H. Jenkins‐Smith","doi":"10.15191/nwajom.2021.0907","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Forecasters are responsible for predicting the weather and communicating risk with stakeholders and members of the public. This study investigates the statements that forecasters use to communicate probability information in hurricane forecasts and the impact these statements may have on how members of the public evaluate forecast reliability. We use messages on Twitter to descriptively analyze probability statements in forecasts leading up to Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, Maria, and Florence from forecasters in three different groups: the National Hurricane Center, local Weather Forecast Offices, and in the television broadcast community. We then use data from a representative survey of United States adults to assess how members of the public wish to receive probability information and the impact of information format on assessments of forecast reliability. Results from the descriptive analysis indicate forecasters overwhelmingly use words and phrases in place of numbers to communicate probability information. In addition, the words and phrases forecasters use are generally vague in nature -- they seldom include rank adjectives (e.g., “low” or “high”) to qualify blanket expressions of uncertainty (e.g., “there is a chance of flooding”). Results from the survey show members of the public generally prefer both words/phrases and numbers when receiving forecast information. They also show information format affects public judgments of forecast reliability; on average, people believe forecasts are more reliable when they include numeric probability information.","PeriodicalId":44039,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Operational Meteorology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Communicating Probability Information in Hurricane Forecasts: Assessing Statements that Forecasters Use on Social Media and Implications for Public Assessments of Reliability\",\"authors\":\"Zoey Rosen, Makenzie J. Krocak, J. Ripberger, Rachael N. Cross, Emily D. Lenhardt, Carol L. Silva, H. Jenkins‐Smith\",\"doi\":\"10.15191/nwajom.2021.0907\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Forecasters are responsible for predicting the weather and communicating risk with stakeholders and members of the public. This study investigates the statements that forecasters use to communicate probability information in hurricane forecasts and the impact these statements may have on how members of the public evaluate forecast reliability. We use messages on Twitter to descriptively analyze probability statements in forecasts leading up to Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, Maria, and Florence from forecasters in three different groups: the National Hurricane Center, local Weather Forecast Offices, and in the television broadcast community. We then use data from a representative survey of United States adults to assess how members of the public wish to receive probability information and the impact of information format on assessments of forecast reliability. Results from the descriptive analysis indicate forecasters overwhelmingly use words and phrases in place of numbers to communicate probability information. In addition, the words and phrases forecasters use are generally vague in nature -- they seldom include rank adjectives (e.g., “low” or “high”) to qualify blanket expressions of uncertainty (e.g., “there is a chance of flooding”). Results from the survey show members of the public generally prefer both words/phrases and numbers when receiving forecast information. They also show information format affects public judgments of forecast reliability; on average, people believe forecasts are more reliable when they include numeric probability information.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44039,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Operational Meteorology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Operational Meteorology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15191/nwajom.2021.0907\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Operational Meteorology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15191/nwajom.2021.0907","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Communicating Probability Information in Hurricane Forecasts: Assessing Statements that Forecasters Use on Social Media and Implications for Public Assessments of Reliability
Forecasters are responsible for predicting the weather and communicating risk with stakeholders and members of the public. This study investigates the statements that forecasters use to communicate probability information in hurricane forecasts and the impact these statements may have on how members of the public evaluate forecast reliability. We use messages on Twitter to descriptively analyze probability statements in forecasts leading up to Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, Maria, and Florence from forecasters in three different groups: the National Hurricane Center, local Weather Forecast Offices, and in the television broadcast community. We then use data from a representative survey of United States adults to assess how members of the public wish to receive probability information and the impact of information format on assessments of forecast reliability. Results from the descriptive analysis indicate forecasters overwhelmingly use words and phrases in place of numbers to communicate probability information. In addition, the words and phrases forecasters use are generally vague in nature -- they seldom include rank adjectives (e.g., “low” or “high”) to qualify blanket expressions of uncertainty (e.g., “there is a chance of flooding”). Results from the survey show members of the public generally prefer both words/phrases and numbers when receiving forecast information. They also show information format affects public judgments of forecast reliability; on average, people believe forecasts are more reliable when they include numeric probability information.