Forecaster Performance and Workload: Does Radar Update Time Matter?Source: Weather and Forecasting:;2016:;volume( 032 ):;issue: 001::page 253Author:Wilson, Katie A.
,
Heinselman, Pamela L.
,
Kuster, Charles M.
,
Kingfield, Darrel M.
,
Kang, Ziho
DOI: 10.1175/WAF-D-16-0157.1Publisher: American Meteorological Society
Abstract: mpacts of radar update time on forecasters? warning decision processes were analyzed in the 2015 Phased Array Radar Innovative Sensing Experiment. Thirty National Weather Service forecasters worked nine archived phased-array radar (PAR) cases in simulated real time. These cases presented nonsevere, severe hail and/or wind, and tornadic events. Forecasters worked each type of event with approximately 5-min (quarter speed), 2-min (half speed), and 1-min (full speed) PAR updates. Warning performance was analyzed with respect to lead time and verification. Combining all cases, forecasters? median warning lead times when using full-, half-, and quarter-speed PAR updates were 17, 14.5, and 13.6 min, respectively. The use of faster PAR updates also resulted in higher probability of detection and lower false alarm ratio scores. Radar update speed did not impact warning duration or size. Analysis of forecaster performance on a case-by-case basis showed that the impact of PAR update speed varied depending on the situation. This impact was most noticeable during the tornadic cases, where radar update speed positively impacted tornado warning lead time during two supercell events, but not for a short-lived tornado occurring within a bowing line segment. Forecasters? improved ability to correctly discriminate the severe weather threat during a nontornadic supercell event with faster PAR updates was also demonstrated. Forecasters provided subjective assessments of their cognitive workload in all nine cases. On average, forecasters were not cognitively overloaded, but some participants did experience higher levels of cognitive workload at times. A qualitative explanation of these particular instances is provided.
|
Collections
Show full item record
contributor author | Wilson, Katie A. | |
contributor author | Heinselman, Pamela L. | |
contributor author | Kuster, Charles M. | |
contributor author | Kingfield, Darrel M. | |
contributor author | Kang, Ziho | |
date accessioned | 2017-06-09T17:37:36Z | |
date available | 2017-06-09T17:37:36Z | |
date copyright | 2017/02/01 | |
date issued | 2016 | |
identifier issn | 0882-8156 | |
identifier other | ams-88296.pdf | |
identifier uri | http://onlinelibrary.yabesh.ir/handle/yetl/4232060 | |
description abstract | mpacts of radar update time on forecasters? warning decision processes were analyzed in the 2015 Phased Array Radar Innovative Sensing Experiment. Thirty National Weather Service forecasters worked nine archived phased-array radar (PAR) cases in simulated real time. These cases presented nonsevere, severe hail and/or wind, and tornadic events. Forecasters worked each type of event with approximately 5-min (quarter speed), 2-min (half speed), and 1-min (full speed) PAR updates. Warning performance was analyzed with respect to lead time and verification. Combining all cases, forecasters? median warning lead times when using full-, half-, and quarter-speed PAR updates were 17, 14.5, and 13.6 min, respectively. The use of faster PAR updates also resulted in higher probability of detection and lower false alarm ratio scores. Radar update speed did not impact warning duration or size. Analysis of forecaster performance on a case-by-case basis showed that the impact of PAR update speed varied depending on the situation. This impact was most noticeable during the tornadic cases, where radar update speed positively impacted tornado warning lead time during two supercell events, but not for a short-lived tornado occurring within a bowing line segment. Forecasters? improved ability to correctly discriminate the severe weather threat during a nontornadic supercell event with faster PAR updates was also demonstrated. Forecasters provided subjective assessments of their cognitive workload in all nine cases. On average, forecasters were not cognitively overloaded, but some participants did experience higher levels of cognitive workload at times. A qualitative explanation of these particular instances is provided. | |
publisher | American Meteorological Society | |
title | Forecaster Performance and Workload: Does Radar Update Time Matter? | |
type | Journal Paper | |
journal volume | 32 | |
journal issue | 1 | |
journal title | Weather and Forecasting | |
identifier doi | 10.1175/WAF-D-16-0157.1 | |
journal fristpage | 253 | |
journal lastpage | 274 | |
tree | Weather and Forecasting:;2016:;volume( 032 ):;issue: 001 | |
contenttype | Fulltext |