If we named our
hurricanes differently, would it save lives?
Picture this scenario: it’s mid-October and a weather
alert pops on your screen, advising you that a hurricane is headed our way.
It’s still four days away, and while they’re not altogether certain how
powerful it will be, or where it may strike land, you’re thinking – what should
I do to prepare, if anything?
Now suppose you heard that the hurricane’s name was
Jennifer. But later you learned that it
was named Jack. Would it make a
difference?
Apparently it would, according to researchers from the
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign who maintain that people judge
hurricane risk, in part, based on its name.
In their study “Why Have Female Hurricanes Killed More People than Male
Ones?” they explain that the more feminine the name, the less likely people are
to take preparatory action (note: their study was published in the Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences).
Said the authors:
“Meteorologists and geoscientists have called for greater consideration
of social science factors that predict responses to natural hazards. We answer
this call by highlighting the influence of an unexplored social factor,
gender-based expectations, on the human toll of hurricanes that are assigned
gendered names. Feminine-named hurricanes (vs. masculine-named hurricanes)
cause significantly more deaths, apparently because they lead to lower
perceived risk and consequently less preparedness. Using names such as Eloise
or Charlie for referencing hurricanes has been thought by meteorologists to
enhance the clarity and recall of storm information. We show that this practice
also taps into well-developed and widely held gender stereotypes, with potentially
deadly consequences.”
The authors’ conclusions been challenged on several
counts, but their message is worth serious consideration: would we save lives
if we named hurricanes based on their severity? In other words, when we decide
whether to take action, for a coming storm, to what degree are we influenced by
the relative femininity and masculinity of a hurricane’s name?
The authors’ analysis included 94 hurricanes that struck
the U.S. between 1950 and 2012, recognizing that up until 1979, hurricanes were
only given female names (for the dataset 1950-1978, the researchers did examine
the relative femininity of the name).
The study was strongly criticized by social scientist
Jeff Lazo from the National Centre for Atmospheric Research. According to an
article by Ed Yong, on National Geographic’s web site, “[Lazo] thinks the
pattern is most likely a statistical fluke which arose because of the ways in
which the team analyzed their data.”
As the debates takes flight, few would disagree that that
“men are linked to strength and aggression, and women with warmth and
passivity,” according to Yong’s article. The question is: do these unconscious
biases have real-life consequences in how we prepare for impending storms?
Said study author Sharon Shavitt, as quoted in Yong’s
article: “It may make sense to move away from human names, but other labels
could also create problems if they are associated with perceptions of mildness
or gentleness. . . . The key is to provide information and labels that are
relevant to the storm’s severity.”
##
No comments:
Post a Comment