Browsing by Author "Hetland, Audun"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4

Colours and maps for communicating natural hazards to users with and without colour vision deficiency
(Elsevier BV, 2022-06) Engeset, Rune Verpe; Pfuhl, Gerit; Orten, Camilla; Hendrikx, Jordy; Hetland, Audun
Natural hazards are often communicated visually using colours and maps. However, users' ability to read and understand these products may be hampered by e.g., colour vision deficiency, potentially rendering the products less effective or even counter effective. To study these effects, we conducted two web-based surveys and analysed how to improve visual communication of avalanches, floods, landslides, and dangerous weather hazards. In survey 1 (n = 79), we tested four traffic light colour palettes, three map legends, and three map patterns used for communicating danger levels on the Norwegian website Varsom.no, to improve accessibility for individuals with and without colour vision deficiency (CVD). In survey 2 (n = 960), we tested four versions of traffic light colour palettes on a larger and international population. Survey 2 also tested six versions of Avalanche terrain exposure scale (ATES) maps on individuals with and without CVD varying in nationality, avalanche education and familiarity with ATES. Results suggest that the colours, legends, and maps used on Varsom should be improved, and that danger levels are best communicated with the colour palette used by Meteoalarm.info – in combination with symbols to help users with CVD. This study found that the colour scheme used for ski run difficulty in Europe was efficient for use with ATES maps for participants with and without CVD and is recommended as a worldwide standard for ATES. Further studies and testing of users’ understanding are recommended to improve clarity of danger level maps and to improve visualization of ATES classes 0 and 1 on maps. Our studies show the hidden potential for efficient and inclusive communication of natural hazards and highlights the importance of including the needs of CVD users in standardisation efforts.
Powder Fever and Its Impact on Decision-Making in Avalanche Terrain
(MDPI AG, 2021-09) Mannberg, Andrea; Hendrikx, Jordy; Johnson, Jerry; Hetland, Audun
We examined the effect of emotions, associated with “powder fever”, on decision-making in avalanche terrain. Background: Skiing in avalanche terrain is a voluntary activity that exposes the participant to potentially fatal risk. Impaired decision-making in this context can therefore have devastating results, often with limited prior corrective feedback and learning opportunities. Previous research has suggested that arousal caused by emotions affects risk assessment and intentions to engage in risky behavior. We propose that powder fever may induce similar responses. Methods: We used the following two experimental methods: laboratory studies with visual visceral stimuli (ski movies) and a field study with real stimuli (skiing exciting terrain). We evaluated the effect of emotions on attention, risk assessment, and willingness to expose oneself and others to risk. Results: Both the laboratory studies and the field study showed that skiing-related stimuli had a relatively strong effect on reported emotions. However, we found very few significant effects on decision-making or assessment of risk. Conclusions: Skiing activities make people happier. However, despite the clear parallels to sexual arousal, powder fever does not appear to significantly impair decision-making in our study. More research on the effects of powder fewer on milder forms of risk-taking behavior is needed.
Rethinking the heuristic traps paradigm in avalanche education: Past, present and future
(2020-08) Johnson, Jerry; Mannberg, Andrea; Hendrikx, Jordy; Hetland, Audun; Stephensen, Matthew
This paper will review the emergence and adoption of decision heuristics as a conceptual framework within the avalanche research and education community and demonstrate how this emphasis on the heuristic decision framework has anchored and was critical in redefining the discussion around avalanche accidents. This paradigm has been a critical and meaningful step in recognizing the importance of decision making in avalanche accidents. However, in an attempt to reduce the incidence of fatal accidents, the adoption of these ideas within the wider avalanche community has overlooked some clearly stated limitations within the foundational work of the heuristic decision frame. With respect to the concept of heuristic traps in conventional avalanche education, the concepts are poorly operationalized to the extent that they are vague about what exactly they describe. The result is that as presently framed, they are of negligible value to avalanche education that seeks its basis on the best available information. We end with a discussion, and a call to action to the avalanche research community, of how we could move towards resolution of these weaknesses and add value to prior work on human factor research. Our aim is not to disparage the seminal, paradigm shifting work by McCammon, but rather draw attention to how it has been operationalized and how the industry needs to move beyond this paradigm to see further gains in our understanding of avalanche fatalities.
Should I judge safety or danger? Perceived risk depends on the question frame.
(American Psychological Association, 2021-04) Stephensen, Matthew B.; Schulze, Christin; Landrø, Markus; Hendrikx, Jordy; Hetland, Audun
Linguistic polarity is a natural characteristic of judgments: Is that situation safe/dangerous? How difficult/easy was the task? Is that politician honest/dishonest? Across six studies (N = 1599), we tested how the qualitative frame of the question eliciting a risk judgment influenced risk perception and behavior intention. Using a series of hypothetical scenarios of skiing in avalanche terrain, experienced backcountry skiers judged either how safe or how dangerous each scenario was and indicated whether they would ski the scenario. Phrasing risk judgments in terms of safety elicited lower judged safety values, which in turn resulted in a lower likelihood of intending to ski the slope. The frame “safe” did not evoke a more positive assessment than the frame “danger” as might be expected under a valence-consistent or communication-driven framing effect. This seemingly paradoxical direction of the effect suggests that the question frame directed attention in a way that guided selective information sampling. Uncertainty was not required for this effect as it was observed when judging objectively safe, uncertain, and dangerous scenarios. These findings advance our theoretical understanding of framing effects and can inform the development of practices that harness question framing for applied risk perception and communication.