Abstract
We explored errors interpreting the seasonal climate forecast (SCF) statement "In the next 3 months, the probability of exceeding median rainfall is 30%" used by the Australian media. Study one comprised 73 farmers and 12 climate staff and (1) developed a five-item multiple-choice questionnaire assessing understanding for the SCF, and (2) assessed errors interpreting the statement. The farmers who incorrectly interpreted the statement (29%) as forecasting a wetter season than normal had a lower understanding of the statement, in contrast to farmers making the correct interpretation (56%) and the climate staff. The statement appeared to be misinterpreted as a specific value of rain that was above the median by 30%, because of (1) difficulty conceptualizing 'above median rainfall' and 'below median rainfall' as distinct events, and (2) the percentage being interpreted as a specific value and not as a notion of chance. Study two, with 72 laypersons, showed more errors and slower responses with statements of probabilities less than 50% (i.e. 30%) than statements of probabilities greater than 50% (i.e. 70%), explained by the positive connotation biases of the event 'above median rainfall' and/or the use of the term 'probability'.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 2097-2107 |
| Journal | International Journal of Climatology |
| Volume | 34 |
| Issue number | 6 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2014 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 13 Climate Action
Keywords
- Climatology (excl Climate Change Processes)
- Psychology
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Farmers' accuracy interpreting seasonal climate forecast probability'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver