Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Field research to application: a study of human response to the 2011, Joplin tornado and its impact on alerts and warnings in the USA

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Natural Hazards Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

An EF-5 tornado occurred on May 22, 2011, in the populated area of Joplin, Missouri, causing 161 fatalities and over 1000 injuries. A conceptual model of protective action decision making was developed based on interviews with Joplin tornado survivors to further understand the factors that influenced decision making and sheltering behavior in the 2011 storm. The model showed that the majority of survivors decided at some point before the tornado hit that the act of seeking protection was not necessary, primarily due to a lack of tornado-related physical cues; previous experiences with tornadoes via false alarms; confusing and/or inconsistent emergency communication regarding the tornado; and/or tornado beliefs about Joplin’s geography. These individuals took action to protect themselves after witnessing audible or visual cues signaling imminent danger to them. Since this work was completed, efforts have been underway to translate this research from theory to practice. Namely, the findings from this work have been developed into guidance for communities on alerting for tornadoes, including the development of message templates and decision-making tools to improve methods for communicating with populations under imminent threat of tornadoes and other wind storm events.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The NWS defines a false alarm as an unverified tornado warning. In other words, a tornado warning polygon for which no visual reports or damage indicators demonstrate that a tornado occurred during the valid time period of the warning.

  2. 10 percent of the survivor interviews were conducted with managers and employees of local businesses and institutions, 10 percent provided information regarding individuals who died from the storm, and 10 percent of interviewees were among the injured.

  3. For the interviews performed to understand the pattern, location, and causes of deaths, the same interview guide and questions were used during the interviews with friends/families of victims, however, were asked (to the extent possible) of the interviewee about the person who died.

  4. All percentages included in Fig. 3 are associated with the 140 people in the sample (as the denominator for the percentage).

  5. It is important to note that Joplin residents had limited access to underground or tornado–resistant shelters. There were no community shelters or safe rooms in the City of Joplin or Jasper County at the time of the May 22, 2011, Joplin tornado. Also, 82 percent of the homes in Joplin lacked basements. Only a few non–residential buildings were equipped with underground locations (e.g., basements), and none was identified as having a tornado–resistant shelter above ground.

References

  • Aguirre BE, Anderson WA, Balandran S, Peters BE, White MH (1991) Saragosa, Texas, tornado May 22, 1987: an evaluation of the warning wystem. Natural Disaster Studies, vol 3. National Academy Press, 76 pp

  • Balluz L, Schieve L, Holmes T et al (2000) Predictors for people’s response to a tornado warning: Arkansas, 1 March 1997. Disasters 24:71–77. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-7717.00132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanchard-Boehm RD, Cook MJ (2004) Risk communication and public education in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada on the 10th anniversary of the ‘Black Friday’ Tornado. Int Res Geogr Environ Educ 13:38–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/10382040408668791

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brotzge J, Donner W (2013) The tornado warning process: a review of current research, challenges, and opportunities. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 94:1715–1733. https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-12-00147.1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown S, Archer P, Kruger E, Mallonee S (2002) Tornado-related deaths and injuries in Oklahoma due to the 3 May 1999 tornadoes. Weather Forecast 17:11

    Google Scholar 

  • Comstock RD, Mallonee S (2005) Comparing reactions to two severe tornadoes in one Oklahoma community: comparing reactions to two severe tornadoes in one Oklahoma community. Disasters 29:277–287. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0361-3666.2005.00291.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doermann JL (2019) Development of a research-based short message creation tool for wildfire emergencies. University of Maryland, College Park

    Google Scholar 

  • Donner WR, Rodriguez H, Diaz W (2007) Public warning response following tornadoes in New Orleans, LA, and Springfield, MO: a sociological analysis. 87th AMS annual meeting

  • Donner WR, Rodriguez H, Diaz W (2012) Tornado warnings in three southern states: a qualitative analysis of public response patterns. JHSEM. https://doi.org/10.1515/1547-7355.1955

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drabek TE (1986) Human system responses to disaster: an inventory of sociological findings. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fritz CE (1961) Disaster. In: Merton RK, Nisbet RA (eds) Contemporary social problems. Harcourt, Brace & World, New York, pp 651–694

    Google Scholar 

  • Fritz CE (1968) Disasters. In: Sills D (ed) International encyclopedia of the social sciences. MacMillan, New York, pp 202–207

    Google Scholar 

  • Fritz CE, Marks E (1954) The NORC studies of human behavior in disaster. J Soc Issues 10:26–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gladwin CH, Gladwin H, Peacock WG (2001) Modeling hurricane evacuation decisions with ethnographic methods. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 19:117–143

    Google Scholar 

  • Govtech (Government Technology Emergency Management) (2015) Missouri cities seek uniform standard for storm-warning sirens. https://www.govtech.com/em/disaster/Missouri-Cities-Uniform-Standard-Storm-Warning.html. Accessed 26 Aug 2019

  • Hammer B, Schmidlin TW (2002) Response to warnings during the 3 May 1999 Oklahoma City tornado: reasons and relative injury rates. Weather Forecast 17:6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodler TW (1982) Residents’ preparedness and response to the Kalamazoo tornado. Disasters 6:44–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7717.1982.tb00743.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janis IL, Mann L (1977) Emergency decision making: a theoretical analysis of responses to disaster warnings. J Hum Stress 3:35–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/0097840X.1977.9936085

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson NS (2013) How people respond: a meta-synthesis of post-tornado interviews and surveys. M.S. North Carolina State University

  • Klockow KE (2011) Investigation of individual spatial awareness relating to response during the April 27, 2011 (No. QR224). Natural Hazards Center: University of Colorado at Boulder. Retrieved from https://www.colorado.edu/hazards/research/qr/submitted/klockow_draft_2011.pdf

  • Klockow KE, Peppler RA, McPherson RA (2014) Tornado folk science in Alabama and Mississippi in the 27 April 2011 tornado outbreak. GeoJournal 79:791–804. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-013-9518-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuligowski ED, Doermann J (2018) A review of public response to short message alerts under imminent threat. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kuligowski ED, Kimball A (2018) Alerting under imminent threat: guidance on alerts issued by outdoor siren and short message alerting systems. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kuligowski ED, Wakeman K (2017) Outdoor siren systems: a review of technology, usage, and public response during emergencies. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kuligowski ED, Lombardo FL, Phan LT, Levitan ML, Jorgensen DP (2014) Final Report, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Technical Investigation of the May 22, 2011, Tornado in Joplin, Missouri, NIST NCSTAR 3. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD

  • Landry T, Rogers G (1982) Warning confirmation and dissemination. Center for Social and Urban Research, University of Pittsburgh

  • Lindell MK (2018) Communicating imminent risk. In: Rodríguez H, Trainor J, Donner W (eds) Handbook of disaster research. Springer, New York, pp 449–477

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lindell MK, Perry RW (2004) Communicating environmental risk in multiethnic communities. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Luo J, Cong Z, Liang D (2015) Number of warning information sources and decision making during tornadoes. Am J Prev Med 48:334–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2014.09.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell JA (2005) Qualitative research design: an interactive approach. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Mileti DS, Sorensen JH (1990) Communication of emergency public warnings. ORNL-6609. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN

  • Miran SM, Ling C, Rothfusz L (2018) Factors influencing people’s decision-making during three consecutive tornado events. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 28:150–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.02.034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchem JD (2003) An analysis of the September 20, 2002, Indianapolis tornado: Public response to a tornado warning and damage assessment difficulties (No. QR161). Retrieved from https://hazards.colorado.edu/uploads/documents/qr161.pdf

  • Morss RE, Lazo JK, Demuth JL (2010) Examining the use of weather forecasts in decision scenarios: results from a US survey with implications for uncertainty communication. Meteorol Appl 17:149–162. https://doi.org/10.1002/met.196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagele DE, Trainor JE (2012) Geographic specificity, tornadoes, and protective action. Weather Clim Soc 4:145–155. https://doi.org/10.1175/WCAS-D-11-00047.1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Fire Protection Association (2019) Standard on continuity, emergency, and crisis management. National Fire Protection Association, Quincy

    Google Scholar 

  • National Weather Service (2011) NWS Central Region Service Assessment: Joplin, Missouri, Tornado – May 22, 2011. https://www.nws.noaa.gov/om/assessments/pdfs/Joplin_tornado.pdf. Accessed 26 Aug 2019

  • Okabe K, Mikami S (1982) A study on the socio-psychological effect of a false warning of the Tokai earthquake in Japan. A paper presented at the Tenth World Congress of Sociology, Mexico City, Mexico

  • Paul BK, Stimers M (2011) Tornado warnings and tornado fatalities: the case of May 22, 2011 Tornado in Joplin, Missouri. 33 Retrieved from https://www.colorado.edu/hazards/research/qr/submitted/paul_2011.pdf

  • Paul BK, Stimers M, Caldas M (2015) Predictors of compliance with tornado warnings issued in Joplin, Missouri, in 2011. Disasters 39:108–124. https://doi.org/10.1111/disa.12087

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry RW, Lindell MK, Greene MR (1981) Evacuation planning in emergency management. Lexington Books, Lexington

    Google Scholar 

  • Ripberger JT, Silva CL, Jenkins-Smith HC, James M (2015) The influence of consequence-based messages on public responses to tornado warnings. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 96:577–590. https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00213.1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritchie J, Spencer L (1994) Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In: Bryman A, Burgess RG (eds) Analyzing qualitative data. Taylor & Francis, New York, pp 173–194

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ritchie J, Spencer L, O’Connor W (2003) Carrying out qualitative analysis. In: Ritchie J, Lewis J (eds) Qualitative research practice, a guide for social science students and researchers. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 219–262

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers GO, Sorensen JH (1991) Diffusion of emergency warning: comparing empirical and simulation results. In: Zervos C, Knox K, Abramson L, Coppock R (eds) Risk analysis. Springer US, Boston, pp 117–134

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidlin TW, King PS, Hammer BO, Ono Y (1998) Risk factors for death in the 22–23 February 1998 Florida tornadoes. Natural Hazards Research Applications and Information Center Quick Response Rep. 106, 8 pp

  • Schmidlin TW, Hammer BO, Ono Y, King PS (2009) Tornado shelter-seeking behavior and tornado shelter options among mobile home residents in the United States. Nat Hazards 48:191–201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-008-9257-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherman-Morris K (2005) Tornadoes, television and trust—a closer look at the influence of the local weathercaster during severe weather. Glob Environ Change Part B Environ Hazards 6:201–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hazards.2006.10.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherman-Morris K (2010) Tornado warning dissemination and response at a university campus. Nat Hazards 52:623–638. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-009-9405-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmons KM, Sutter D (2006) Direct estimation of the cost effectiveness of tornado shelters. Risk Anal 26:945–954. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00790.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmons KM, Sutter D (2011) Economic and societal impacts of tornadoes. American Meteorological Society, Boston

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Simmons KM, Sutter D (2012) Deadly season: analysis of the 2011 tornado outbreaks. American Meteorological Society, Boston

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Metro Skywarn (2016) Twin cities metro area siren policy. https://epsyq.com/MSW/index.php/spotter-resources/24-twin-cities-metro-area-siren-policy. Accessed 26 Aug 2019

  • Strauss AL, Corbin JM (1998) Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutton J, Kuligowski ED (2019) Alerts and warnings on short messaging channels: guidance from an expert panel process. Nat Hazards Rev 20:04019002. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trainor JE, Nagele D, Philips B, Scott B (2015) Tornadoes, social science, and the false alarm effect. Weather Clim Soc 7:333–352. https://doi.org/10.1175/WCAS-D-14-00052.1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood M, Mileti DS, Bean H, Liu BF, Sutton J, Madden S (2017) Milling and public warnings. Environ Behav 50:535–566. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916517709561

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao M, Rosoff H, John RS (2019) Media disaster reporting effects on public risk perception and response to escalating tornado warnings: a natural experiment: media disaster reporting effects. Risk Anal 39:535–552. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13205

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Jennifer Spinney (University of Western Ontario, Department of Anthropology) who was on contract to collect the field data for this study. The author would also like to thank the many survivors of Joplin, MO, whose stories she will carry with her always. The author is grateful to Emily Walpole, Jiann Yang, and Nelson Bryner from NIST, Frank Lombardo from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and Jeannette Sutton from the University of Kentucky for their insights on this article (pre-submission). The author also thanks NIST for permission to use text, and NIST and GeoEye/MJ Harden Aerial Imagery for permission to use figures from NIST’s Final Report NCSTAR 3 (Kuligowski et al. 2014). Finally, thank you also to Long Phan, Marc Levitan, Frank Lombardo, and David Jorgensen, co-authors on NIST’s final report of the Technical Investigation of the Joplin, MO tornado, and the peer (blind) reviewers who provided insightful comments on this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, 20899, USA

    Erica D. Kuligowski

Authors
  1. Erica D. Kuligowski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Erica D. Kuligowski.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kuligowski, E.D. Field research to application: a study of human response to the 2011, Joplin tornado and its impact on alerts and warnings in the USA. Nat Hazards 102, 1057–1076 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-020-03945-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-020-03945-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation