End user and forecaster interpretations of the European Avalanche Danger Scale: A study of avalanche probability judgments in Scotland

We investigate Scottish end users' and professional forecasters' risk perception in relation to the 5-point European Avalanche Danger Scale by eliciting numerical estimates of the probability of triggering an avalanche. Our main findings are that neither end users nor professional forecasters interpret the avalanche danger scale as intended, that is, in an exponential fashion. Second, we find that numerical interpretations by end users and professional forecasters have high variance, but are similar, in that both groups tend to overestimate the probability of triggering an avalanche and underestimate the relative risk increase. Finally, we find significant differences in the perceived probability of triggering an avalanche relative to a low or moderate avalanche danger level, and in the numerical interpretation of verbal probability terms depending on whether respondents provide their estimates using a frequency or a percentage chance format. We summarize our findings by identifying important lessons to improve avalanche risk understanding and its communication.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Risk Analysis
Published
2025-03-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.70016
Primary Topic
Meteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

End user and forecaster interpretations of the European Avalanche Danger Scale: A study of avalanche probability judgments in Scotland

David Comerford, Philip A. Ebert, David L. Miller, Mark Diggins
Risk Analysis
Meteorological Phenomena and Simulations
article

End user and forecaster interpretations of the European Avalanche Danger Scale: A study of avalanche probability judgments in Scotland

David Comerford, Philip A. Ebert, David L. Miller, Mark Diggins
article en

Abstract

We investigate Scottish end users' and professional forecasters' risk perception in relation to the 5-point European Avalanche Danger Scale by eliciting numerical estimates of the probability of triggering an avalanche. Our main findings are that neither end users nor professional forecasters interpret the avalanche danger scale as intended, that is, in an exponential fashion. Second, we find that numerical interpretations by end users and professional forecasters have high variance, but are similar, in that both groups tend to overestimate the probability of triggering an avalanche and underestimate the relative risk increase. Finally, we find significant differences in the perceived probability of triggering an avalanche relative to a low or moderate avalanche danger level, and in the numerical interpretation of verbal probability terms depending on whether respondents provide their estimates using a frequency or a percentage chance format. We summarize our findings by identifying important lessons to improve avalanche risk understanding and its communication.

Risk AnalysisVol. 45(8)
University of Stirling (GB), UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (GB), Biomathematics and Statistics Scotland (GB)
Arts and Humanities Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 96%
Meteorological Phenomena and Simulations
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.