Abstract
Survey-based studies of household natural hazard preparedness have often relied on individual-level data to predict household-level preparedness behaviors, in doing so neglecting intra-household dynamics’ influence on household decision-making and creating possible methodological concerns. Targeting married, heterosexual couples living in Sarasota County, Florida, this study aims at understanding who the decision-makers are in a three-stage household decision-making process—problem initiation, information search and evaluation, and final decisions—regarding household hurricane preparedness. The study then investigates how the decision-makers in the decision-making stages impact their households’ levels of preparedness. Survey results of 170 couples indicate that at least half of all households stated that they make joint decisions during all three stages of decision-making, and joint decision-making corresponds with a high level of preparedness during each stage. Households that make joint decisions throughout the decision-making process have significantly higher levels of preparedness than households in which wives make decisions independently throughout the process or no one makes decisions at all throughout the process. This study also investigates the level of adoption for each of the preparedness items and behaviors according to the various decision-makers. Practitioners should note the prevalence of joint decision-making in household natural hazard preparedness and promote preparedness activities for households in which wives serve as the sole decision-makers. This study shows the importance of considering intra-household dynamics in household natural hazard preparedness research.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Among all wife decision-makers in stage 1 (n = 22), seventeen (17) of them had prepared “a 3-day supply of water” in case of hurricane hazards. The preparedness rate for a 3-day supply of water for wife decision-makers in stage 1 is thus 17/22 = .77. This number is indicated in the first cell in Table 11.
Due to the different classification methods between this survey and Census 2010, the comparison between the two datasets have one-year differences in each group. The 26–45 age group in the sample was compared to the 25–44 age group in Census 2010; the 46–65 age group in the sample was compared to the 45–64 age group in Census 2010; and the 65 + age group (66 years old or older) in the sample was compared to the 65 + age group in Census 2010.
The results of the Levene’s tests were not significant.
These 13 preparedness items and behaviors were: a 3-day supply of water, a 3-day supply of canned food, a 3-day supply of medicines, a can opener, rainwear or other protective clothing, knowledge of how to turn off the utilities, an electric generator, a fire extinguisher, a family evacuation plan, an emergency contact outside of the family, knowledge of the evacuation zone for the family, a yard clear of potential airborne items, and a full tank of gas.
Households with low preparedness levels might also indicate that the family members can simply leave or evacuate without consciously preparing for hurricanes.
I calculated the frequency of each of the 19 preparedness items for which the households chose “neither” in stage 3 (n = 7). The top seven items that those households had prepared in case of hurricane were: A can opener (86%), sleeping bags or extra bedding (71%), flood and/or wind insurance (71%), shutters for windows or stormproof windows (71%), knowledge of how to turn off the utilities (57%), rainwear or other protective clothing (57%), and an emergency contact outside of the family (57%). Those seven items could be considered preparedness items that do not require special preparation in case of a hurricane.
References
Baker EJ (2011) Household preparedness for the aftermath of hurricanes in Florida. Appl Geogr 31:46–52
Basolo V, Steinberg LJ, Burby RJ et al (2009) The effects of confidence in government and information on perceived and actual preparedness for disasters. Environ Behav 41:338–364
Baxter J (2005) To marry or not to marry marital status and the household division of labor. J Fam Issues 26:300–321
Belch GE, Belch MA, Ceresino G (1985) Parental and teenage child influences in family decision making. J Bus Res 13:163–176. doi:10.1016/0148-2963(85)90038-4
Blood RO, Wolfe DM (1960) Husbands and wives: the dynamics of married living. Free Press, Glencoe
Cherniack EP, Sandals L, Brooks L, Mintzer M (2008) Trial of a survey instrument to establish the hurricane preparedness of and medical impact on a vulnerable older population. Prehospital Disaster Med 23:242–249
Davis HL (1976) Decision making within the household. J Consumer Res 2:241–260
Davis HL, Rigaux BP (1974) Perception of marital roles in decision processes. J Consumer Res 1:51–62
Dong MC, Li SY (2007) Conflict resolution in Chinese family purchase decisions: the impact of changing female roles and marriage duration. Int J Conflict Manag 18:308–324. doi:10.1108/10444060710833441
Duval TS, Mulilis J-P (1999) A person-relative-to-event (PrE) approach to negative threat appeals and earthquake preparedness: a field study 1. J Appl Soc Psychol 29:495–516. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1999.tb01398.x
Ferber R, Lee LC (1974) Husband–wife influence in family purchasing behavior. J Consumer Res 1:43–50
Field A (2013) Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics, 4th edn. Sage, London
Fodness D (1992) The impact of family life cycle on the vacation decision-making process. J Travel Res 31:8–13. doi:10.1177/004728759203100202
Fothergill A (1996) Gender, risk, and disaster. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 14:33–56
Gredal K (1966) Purchasing behavior in households. In: Max Kjaer H (ed) Readings in Danish theory of marketing. North Holland, Amsterdam, pp 84–100
Grothmann T, Reusswig F (2006) People at risk of flooding: why some residents take precautionary action while others do not. Nat Hazards 38:101–120
Hopper JS, Burns AC, Sherrell DL (1989) An assessment of the reliability and validity of husband and wife self-report purchase decision making measures. JAMS 17:227–234. doi:10.1007/BF02729814
Horney J, Snider C, Malone S et al (2008) Factors associated with hurricane preparedness: results of a pre-hurricane assessment. J Disaster Res 3:1–7
Howe PD (2011) Hurricane preparedness as anticipatory adaptation: a case study of community businesses. Glob Environ Change 21:711–720
Huang S-K, Lindell MK, Prater CS (2016) Who leaves and who stays? A review and statistical meta-analysis of hurricane evacuation studies. Environ Behav 48:991–1029. doi:10.1177/0013916515578485
Jaffe LJ, Senft H (1966) The roles of husbands and wives in purchasing decisions. In: Adler L, Crespi I (eds) attitude research at sea. American Marketing Association, Chicago, pp 95–110
Kim Y-C, Kang J (2010) Communication, neighbourhood belonging and household hurricane preparedness. Disasters 34:470–488
Kirschenbaum A (2003) The mother hen effect. Chaos organization and disaster management. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 177–213
Kirschenbaum A (2006) Families and disaster behavior: a reassessment of family preparedness. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 24:111–143
Lindell MK (2013) Disaster studies. Curr Sociol 61:797–825. doi:10.1177/0011392113484456
Lindell MK, Perry RW (2004) Communicating environmental risk in multiethnic communities. SAGE, Thousand Oaks
Lindell MK, Perry RW (2012) The protective action decision model: theoretical modifications and additional evidence. Risk Anal 32:616–632
Lindell MK, Whitney DJ (2000) Correlates of household seismic hazard adjustment adoption. Risk Anal 20:13–26. doi:10.1111/0272-4332.00002
Lindell MK, Arlikatti S, Prater CS (2009) Why people do what they do to protect against earthquake risk: perceptions of hazard adjustment attributes. Risk Anal 29:1072–1088. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2009.01243.x
Mahdaviazad H, Abdolahifar G (2014) Assessing household natural disaster preparedness in Shiraz, Iran, 2011: results of a knowledge, attitude, and practices survey. Disaster Med Pub Health Prepare 8:349–352. doi:10.1017/dmp.2014.61
Makgosa R, Kang J (2009) Conflict resolution strategies in joint purchase decisions for major household consumer durables: a cross-cultural investigation. Int J Consumer Stud 33:338–348. doi:10.1111/j.1470-6431.2009.00747.x
Mulilis J-P (1999) Gender and earthquake preparedness: a research study of gender issues in disaster management: differences in earthquake preparedness due to traditional stereotyping or cognitive appraisal of threat? Aust J Emerg Manag 14:41–50
Munsinger GM, Weber JE, Hansen RW (1975) Joint home purchasing decisions by husbands and wives. J Consumer Res 1:60–66
Nelson MC (1988) The resolution of conflict in joint purchase decisions by husbands and wives: a review and empirical test. Adv Consum Res 15:436–441
Paton D (2003) Disaster preparedness: a social-cognitive perspective. Disaster Prevention and Management 12:210–216
Qualls WJ (1987) Household decision behavior: the impact of husbands’ and wives’ sex role orientation. J Consumer Res 14:264–279
Qualls WJ, Jaffe F (1992) Measuring conflict in household decision behavior: read my lips and read my mind. Adv Consum Res 19:522–531
Ronan KR, Alisic E, Towers B et al (2015) Disaster preparedness for children and families: a critical review. Curr Psychiatry Rep 17:1–9. doi:10.1007/s11920-015-0589-6
Russell LA, Goltz JD, Bourque LB (1995) Preparedness and hazard mitigation actions before and after two earthquakes. Environ Behav 27:744–770
Sattler DN, Kaiser CF, Hittner JB (2000) Disaster preparedness: relationships among prior experience, personal characteristics, and distress. J Appl Soc Psychol 30:1396–1420. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02527.x
Shelton BA, John D (1993) Does marital status make a difference? “Housework among married and cohabiting men and women”. J Fam Issues 14:401–420
Sheth JN (1974) A theory of family buying decisions. In: Sheth JN (ed) Models of buyer behavior. Harper and Row, New York, pp 17–33
Spiro RL (1983) Persuasion in family decision-making. J Consumer Res 9:393–402
Stets JE, Straus MA (1989) The marriage license as a hitting license: a comparison of assaults in dating, cohabiting, and married couples. J Fam Viol 4:161–180. doi:10.1007/BF01006627
Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council (2013) Disaster planning guide. Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, Pinellas Park
The Sarasota County Government (2015) Sarasota County neighborhoods online directory. https://www.scgov.net/NeighborhoodServices/Neighborhood/Neighborhoods%20Online%20Directory.pdf. Accessed 2 Feb 2015
U.S. Census Bureau (2010) Profile of general population and housing characteristics: 2010. 2010 Census summary file 1. https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/searchresults.xhtml?refresh=t. Accessed 7 Dec 2016
Wang C, Yarnal B (2012) The vulnerability of the elderly to hurricane hazards in Sarasota, Florida. Nat Hazards 63:349–373. doi:10.1007/s11069-012-0151-3
Acknowledgements
The author wishes to thank Brent Yarnal, Nate Frey, and Chongming Wang for their comments on earlier drafts of this paper. Stephanie M. Scott assisted with editing.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hung, LS. Married couples’ decision-making about household natural hazard preparedness: a case study of hurricane hazards in Sarasota County, Florida. Nat Hazards 87, 1057–1081 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-017-2809-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-017-2809-3