Visualizing seismic risk and uncertainty

A review of related research

Ann Bostrom, Luc Anselin, Jeremy Farris

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

54 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Government agencies and other authorities often communicate earthquake risks using maps derived from geographic information systems. Yet, little is known about the effects of these maps on risk perceptions. While mental models research and other approaches are available to inform risk communication text design, similar empirically derived guidance is lacking for visual risk communications, such as maps, which are likely to trump text in their impact and appeal. This paper reviews the empirical research that might inform such guidance. Research on graphs, spatial and visual perception, and map design suggests that graphics increase risk avoidance over numerical risk representations, and countable visuals, like dots, can increase the accuracy of perceived risks, but not always. Cartographic design features, such as color, animation, interactivity, and depth cues, are all candidates to represent risk and uncertainty and to influence risk perception. While there are robust known effects of color (e.g., red = danger), with some cultural variability, animation can increase the salience of otherwise obscure features but is not uniformly effective. Depth cues, dimensionality, and the extent to which a representation depicts versus symbolizes a scene will influence the viewer's perspective and perception, depending on the viewer's familiarity with the scene; their effects on risk perception remain unclear. The translation and representation of technical information about risk and uncertainty is critical to risk communication effectiveness. Our review suggests a handful of candidate criteria for evaluating the effects of risk visualizations, short of changes in behavior: accuracy, accessibility, retention, and perceived risk and usefulness.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences
Pages29-40
Number of pages12
Volume1128
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2008
Externally publishedYes

Publication series

NameAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences
Volume1128
ISSN (Print)00778923
ISSN (Electronic)17496632

Fingerprint

Uncertainty
Research
Risk perception
Animation
Communication
Cues
Color
Government Agencies
Geographic Information Systems
Earthquakes
Visual Perception
Empirical Research
Geographic information systems
Visualization

Keywords

  • Maps
  • Risk communication
  • Seismic
  • Uncertainty
  • Visualization

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)

Cite this

Bostrom, A., Anselin, L., & Farris, J. (2008). Visualizing seismic risk and uncertainty: A review of related research. In Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (Vol. 1128, pp. 29-40). (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences; Vol. 1128). https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1399.005

Visualizing seismic risk and uncertainty : A review of related research. / Bostrom, Ann; Anselin, Luc; Farris, Jeremy.

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. Vol. 1128 2008. p. 29-40 (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences; Vol. 1128).

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Bostrom, A, Anselin, L & Farris, J 2008, Visualizing seismic risk and uncertainty: A review of related research. in Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. vol. 1128, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, vol. 1128, pp. 29-40. https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1399.005
Bostrom A, Anselin L, Farris J. Visualizing seismic risk and uncertainty: A review of related research. In Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. Vol. 1128. 2008. p. 29-40. (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences). https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1399.005
Bostrom, Ann ; Anselin, Luc ; Farris, Jeremy. / Visualizing seismic risk and uncertainty : A review of related research. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. Vol. 1128 2008. pp. 29-40 (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences).
@inproceedings{aa10464941cb4c15b14938c66a0ffa92,
title = "Visualizing seismic risk and uncertainty: A review of related research",
abstract = "Government agencies and other authorities often communicate earthquake risks using maps derived from geographic information systems. Yet, little is known about the effects of these maps on risk perceptions. While mental models research and other approaches are available to inform risk communication text design, similar empirically derived guidance is lacking for visual risk communications, such as maps, which are likely to trump text in their impact and appeal. This paper reviews the empirical research that might inform such guidance. Research on graphs, spatial and visual perception, and map design suggests that graphics increase risk avoidance over numerical risk representations, and countable visuals, like dots, can increase the accuracy of perceived risks, but not always. Cartographic design features, such as color, animation, interactivity, and depth cues, are all candidates to represent risk and uncertainty and to influence risk perception. While there are robust known effects of color (e.g., red = danger), with some cultural variability, animation can increase the salience of otherwise obscure features but is not uniformly effective. Depth cues, dimensionality, and the extent to which a representation depicts versus symbolizes a scene will influence the viewer's perspective and perception, depending on the viewer's familiarity with the scene; their effects on risk perception remain unclear. The translation and representation of technical information about risk and uncertainty is critical to risk communication effectiveness. Our review suggests a handful of candidate criteria for evaluating the effects of risk visualizations, short of changes in behavior: accuracy, accessibility, retention, and perceived risk and usefulness.",
keywords = "Maps, Risk communication, Seismic, Uncertainty, Visualization",
author = "Ann Bostrom and Luc Anselin and Jeremy Farris",
year = "2008",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1196/annals.1399.005",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "9781573316811",
volume = "1128",
series = "Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences",
pages = "29--40",
booktitle = "Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Visualizing seismic risk and uncertainty

T2 - A review of related research

AU - Bostrom, Ann

AU - Anselin, Luc

AU - Farris, Jeremy

PY - 2008/4

Y1 - 2008/4

N2 - Government agencies and other authorities often communicate earthquake risks using maps derived from geographic information systems. Yet, little is known about the effects of these maps on risk perceptions. While mental models research and other approaches are available to inform risk communication text design, similar empirically derived guidance is lacking for visual risk communications, such as maps, which are likely to trump text in their impact and appeal. This paper reviews the empirical research that might inform such guidance. Research on graphs, spatial and visual perception, and map design suggests that graphics increase risk avoidance over numerical risk representations, and countable visuals, like dots, can increase the accuracy of perceived risks, but not always. Cartographic design features, such as color, animation, interactivity, and depth cues, are all candidates to represent risk and uncertainty and to influence risk perception. While there are robust known effects of color (e.g., red = danger), with some cultural variability, animation can increase the salience of otherwise obscure features but is not uniformly effective. Depth cues, dimensionality, and the extent to which a representation depicts versus symbolizes a scene will influence the viewer's perspective and perception, depending on the viewer's familiarity with the scene; their effects on risk perception remain unclear. The translation and representation of technical information about risk and uncertainty is critical to risk communication effectiveness. Our review suggests a handful of candidate criteria for evaluating the effects of risk visualizations, short of changes in behavior: accuracy, accessibility, retention, and perceived risk and usefulness.

AB - Government agencies and other authorities often communicate earthquake risks using maps derived from geographic information systems. Yet, little is known about the effects of these maps on risk perceptions. While mental models research and other approaches are available to inform risk communication text design, similar empirically derived guidance is lacking for visual risk communications, such as maps, which are likely to trump text in their impact and appeal. This paper reviews the empirical research that might inform such guidance. Research on graphs, spatial and visual perception, and map design suggests that graphics increase risk avoidance over numerical risk representations, and countable visuals, like dots, can increase the accuracy of perceived risks, but not always. Cartographic design features, such as color, animation, interactivity, and depth cues, are all candidates to represent risk and uncertainty and to influence risk perception. While there are robust known effects of color (e.g., red = danger), with some cultural variability, animation can increase the salience of otherwise obscure features but is not uniformly effective. Depth cues, dimensionality, and the extent to which a representation depicts versus symbolizes a scene will influence the viewer's perspective and perception, depending on the viewer's familiarity with the scene; their effects on risk perception remain unclear. The translation and representation of technical information about risk and uncertainty is critical to risk communication effectiveness. Our review suggests a handful of candidate criteria for evaluating the effects of risk visualizations, short of changes in behavior: accuracy, accessibility, retention, and perceived risk and usefulness.

KW - Maps

KW - Risk communication

KW - Seismic

KW - Uncertainty

KW - Visualization

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=43249100262&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=43249100262&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1196/annals.1399.005

DO - 10.1196/annals.1399.005

M3 - Conference contribution

SN - 9781573316811

VL - 1128

T3 - Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

SP - 29

EP - 40

BT - Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

ER -