Modeling Users’ Trust in Drought Forecasts

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 649-664
Author(s):  
Majid Shafiee-Jood ◽  
Tatyana Deryugina ◽  
Ximing Cai

AbstractForecast valuation studies play a key role in understanding the determinants of the value of weather and climate forecasts. Such understanding provides opportunities to increase the value that users can obtain from forecasts, which can in turn increase the use of forecasts. One of the most important factors that influences how users process forecast information and incorporate forecasts into their decision-making is trust in forecasts. Despite the evidence from empirical and field-based studies, modeling users’ trust in forecasts has not received much attention in the literature and is therefore the focus of our study. We propose a theoretical model of trust in information, built into a forecast valuation framework, to better understand 1) the role of trust in users’ processing of drought forecast information and 2) the dynamic process of users’ trust formation and evolution. Using a numerical experiment, we show that considering the dynamic nature of trust is critical in more realistic assessment of forecast value. We find that users may not perceive a potentially valuable forecast as such until they trust it enough, implying that exposure to even highly accurate forecasts may not immediately translate into forecast use. Ignoring this dynamic aspect could overestimate the economic gains from forecasts. Furthermore, the model offers hypotheses with regard to targeting strategies that can be tested with empirical and field-based studies and used to guide policy interventions.

2017 ◽  
Vol 04 (03) ◽  
pp. 1771001 ◽  
Author(s):  
L Dilling ◽  
R Morss ◽  
O Wilhelmi

Extreme events often bring unexpected situations and impacts, as the sequence of hurricanes and other natural disasters in summer and fall 2017 demonstrated. To reduce the risks associated with such events, many have focused on reducing uncertainty in prediction or reducing vulnerability. Although both are worthy goals, we suggest that the research community should also be focusing on the nature of surprise itself, to investigate the role of surprise in extreme events and its implications. Surprise arises when reality differs from people’s expectations. Multiple factors contribute to creating surprise, including the dynamic nature of natural and human systems, the limitations of scientific knowledge and prediction, and the ways that people interpret and manage risks, not to mention climate variability and change. We argue that surprise is an unavoidable component of weather and climate disasters — one that we must acknowledge, learn to anticipate, and incorporate into risk assessment and management efforts. In sum, although it may seem paradoxical, we should be learning how to expect surprise.


Author(s):  
Stephen Jewson ◽  
Sebastian Scher ◽  
Gabriele Messori

Users of meteorological forecasts are often faced with the question of whether to make a decision now based on the current forecast or whether to wait for the next and hopefully more accurate forecast before making the decision. One would imagine that the answer to this question should depend on the extent to which there is a benefit in making the decision now rather than later, combined with an understanding of how the skill of the forecast improves, and information about the possible size and nature of forecast changes. We extend the well-known cost-loss model for forecast-based decision making to capture an idealized version of this situation. We find that within this extended cost-loss model, the question of whether to decide now or wait depends on two specific aspects of the forecast, both of which involve probabilities of probabilities. For the special case of weather and climate forecasts in the form of normal distributions we derive a simulation algorithm, and equivalent analytical expressions, for calculating these two probabilities. We apply the algorithm to forecasts of temperature and find that the algorithm leads to better decisions relative to three simpler alternative decision-making schemes. Similar problems have been studied in many other fields, and we explore some of the connections.


Author(s):  
Robin Markwica

Why do states frequently reject coercive threats from more powerful opponents? This introductory chapter begins by outlining the explanations in the existing literature for failures of coercive diplomacy. It suggests that these accounts generally share a cognitivist perspective that neglects the role of emotion in target leaders’ decision-making. To capture the social, physiological, and dynamic nature of emotion, it is necessary to introduce an additional action model besides the traditional rationalist and constructivist paradigms. The chapter provides a summary of this logic of affect, or emotional choice theory, which includes a series of propositions specifying the emotional conditions under which target leaders are likely to accept or reject a coercer’s demands. Next, it justifies the selection of the case studies and the book’s focus on political leaders. The chapter ends with a brief outline of the rest of the study.


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Arceneaux

AbstractIntuitions guide decision-making, and looking to the evolutionary history of humans illuminates why some behavioral responses are more intuitive than others. Yet a place remains for cognitive processes to second-guess intuitive responses – that is, to be reflective – and individual differences abound in automatic, intuitive processing as well.


2014 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Pryce ◽  
Amanda Hall

Shared decision-making (SDM), a component of patient-centered care, is the process in which the clinician and patient both participate in decision-making about treatment; information is shared between the parties and both agree with the decision. Shared decision-making is appropriate for health care conditions in which there is more than one evidence-based treatment or management option that have different benefits and risks. The patient's involvement ensures that the decisions regarding treatment are sensitive to the patient's values and preferences. Audiologic rehabilitation requires substantial behavior changes on the part of patients and includes benefits to their communication as well as compromises and potential risks. This article identifies the importance of shared decision-making in audiologic rehabilitation and the changes required to implement it effectively.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document