YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • AMS
    • Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • AMS
    • Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Misinterpretations of Precipitation Probability Forecasts

    Source: Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society:;1980:;volume( 061 ):;issue: 007::page 695
    Author:
    Murphy, Allan H.
    ,
    Lichtenstein, Sarah
    ,
    Fischhoff, Baruch
    ,
    Winkler, Robert L.
    DOI: 10.1175/1520-0477(1980)061<0695:MOPPF>2.0.CO;2
    Publisher: American Meteorological Society
    Abstract: Previous studies have suggested that the general public misinterprets probability of precipitation (PoP) forecasts, leading some meteorologists to argue that probabilities should not be included in public weather forecasts. Upon closer examination, however, these studies prove to be ambiguous with regard to the nature of the misunderstanding. Is the public confused about the meaning of the probabilities or about the definition of the event to which the probabilities refer? If event misinterpretation is the source of the confusion, then elimination of the probabilities would not reduce the level of misunderstanding. The present paper summarizes a study of 79 residents of Eugene, Oreg., who completed a questionnaire designed to investigate their understanding of and attitude toward precipitation probability forecasts. Results indicate that the event in question frequently is misunderstood, with both traditional precipitation forecasts and PoP forecasts producing similar levels of event misinterpretation. On the other hand, the probabilities themselves are well understood. Moreover, most respondents revealed a preference for the use of probabilities to express the uncertainty inherent in precipitation forecasts. Although the sample size was limited, the results of this study strongly support the inclusion of probabilities in public forecasts of precipitation occurrence. The paper concludes with a brief discussion of some implications of these results for operational weather forecasting.
    • Download: (560.7Kb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Statistics

      Misinterpretations of Precipitation Probability Forecasts

    URI
    https://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4160568
    Collections
    • Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society

    Show full item record

    contributor authorMurphy, Allan H.
    contributor authorLichtenstein, Sarah
    contributor authorFischhoff, Baruch
    contributor authorWinkler, Robert L.
    date accessioned2017-06-09T14:39:52Z
    date available2017-06-09T14:39:52Z
    date copyright1980/07/01
    date issued1980
    identifier issn0003-0007
    identifier otherams-23950.pdf
    identifier urihttp://onlinelibrary.yabesh.ir/handle/yetl/4160568
    description abstractPrevious studies have suggested that the general public misinterprets probability of precipitation (PoP) forecasts, leading some meteorologists to argue that probabilities should not be included in public weather forecasts. Upon closer examination, however, these studies prove to be ambiguous with regard to the nature of the misunderstanding. Is the public confused about the meaning of the probabilities or about the definition of the event to which the probabilities refer? If event misinterpretation is the source of the confusion, then elimination of the probabilities would not reduce the level of misunderstanding. The present paper summarizes a study of 79 residents of Eugene, Oreg., who completed a questionnaire designed to investigate their understanding of and attitude toward precipitation probability forecasts. Results indicate that the event in question frequently is misunderstood, with both traditional precipitation forecasts and PoP forecasts producing similar levels of event misinterpretation. On the other hand, the probabilities themselves are well understood. Moreover, most respondents revealed a preference for the use of probabilities to express the uncertainty inherent in precipitation forecasts. Although the sample size was limited, the results of this study strongly support the inclusion of probabilities in public forecasts of precipitation occurrence. The paper concludes with a brief discussion of some implications of these results for operational weather forecasting.
    publisherAmerican Meteorological Society
    titleMisinterpretations of Precipitation Probability Forecasts
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume61
    journal issue7
    journal titleBulletin of the American Meteorological Society
    identifier doi10.1175/1520-0477(1980)061<0695:MOPPF>2.0.CO;2
    journal fristpage695
    journal lastpage701
    treeBulletin of the American Meteorological Society:;1980:;volume( 061 ):;issue: 007
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian