This statistical meta-analysis (SMA) examined 38 studies involving actual responses to hurricane warnings and 11 studies involving expected responses to hypothetical hurricane scenarios conducted since 1991. The results indicate official warnings, mobile home residence, risk area residence, observations of environmental (storm conditions) and social (other people’s behavior) cues, and expectations of severe personal impacts, all have consistently significant effects on household evacuation. Other variables—especially demographic variables—have weaker effects on evacuation, perhaps via indirect effects. Finally, the SMA also indicates that the effect sizes from actual hurricane evacuation studies are similar to those from studies of hypothetical hurricane scenarios for 10 of 17 variables that were examined. These results can be used to guide the design of hurricane evacuation transportation analyses and emergency managers’ warning programs. They also suggest that laboratory and Internet experiments could be used to examine people’s cognitive processing of different types of hurricane warning messages.
AlpízarF.CarlssonF.Johansson-StenmanO. (2008). Does context matter more for hypothetical than for actual contributions? Evidence from a natural field experiment. Experimental Economics, 11, 299-314.
2.
ArlikattiS.LindellM. K.PraterC. S. (2007). Perceived stakeholder role relationships and adoption of seismic hazard adjustments. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 25, 218-256.
3.
ArlikattiS.LindellM. K.PraterC. S.ZhangY. (2006). Risk area accuracy and hurricane evacuation expectations of coastal residents. Environment and Behavior, 38, 226-247.
4.
AschS. E. (1951). Effect of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgments. Journal of Marketing Research, 16, 394-400.
5.
BakerE. J. (1991). Hurricane evacuation behavior. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 9, 287-310.
6.
BakerE. J. (2000). Hurricane evacuation in the United States. In PielkeR. (Ed.), Storms (Vol. 1, pp. 306-319). New York, NY: Routledge.
7.
BatemanJ. M.EdwardsB. (2002). Gender and evacuation: A closer look at why women are more likely to evacuate for hurricanes. Natural Hazards Review, 3, 107-117.
8.
BhattacharjeeS.PetroliaD. R.HansonT. R.ThomasM. (2009, January31-February3). Study of evacuation behavior of Coastal Gulf of Mexico residents. Paper presented at 2009 Southern Agricultural Economics Annual Meeting, Atlanta, GA.
9.
BourqueL. B.ReederL. G.CherlinA.RavenB. H.WaltonD. M. (1973). The unpredictable disaster in a metropolis: Public response to the Los Angeles earthquake of February, 1971. Los Angeles: UCLA Survey Research Center.
10.
BrommerD. M.SenkbeilJ. C. (2010). Pre-landfall evacuee perception of the meteorological hazards associated with Hurricane Gustav. Natural Hazards, 55, 353-369.
11.
CarrascoA. S. (2009). Factors influencing hurricane evacuation among Hispanic population (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. AAI1470293)
12.
CohenJ. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155-159.
13.
CoxJ.HouseD.LindellM. K. (2013). Visualizing uncertainty in predicted hurricane tracks. International Journal for Uncertainty Quantification, 3, 143-156.
14.
CutterS. L.EmrichC. T.BowserG.AngeloD.MitchellJ. T. (2011). 2011 South Carolina hurricane evacuation behavioral study. Columbia: Hazards and Vulnerability Research Institute, Department of Geography, University of South Carolina.
15.
DashN.GladwinH. (2007). Evacuation decision making and behavioral responses: Individual and household. Natural Hazards Review, 8, 69-77.
16.
DavidsonD. J.FreudenbergW. R. (1996). Gender and environmental risk concerns: A review and analysis of available research. Environment and Behavior, 28, 302-339.
17.
DillonR. L.TinsleyC. H. (2008). How near-misses influence decision making under risk: A missed opportunity for learning. Management Science, 54, 1425-1440.
18.
DillonR. L.TinsleyC. H.CroninM. A. (2011). Why near-miss events can decrease an individual’s protective response to hurricanes. Risk Analysis, 31, 440-449.
19.
DowK.CutterS. L. (1998). Crying wolf: Repeat responses to hurricane evacuation orders. Coastal Management, 26, 237-252.
20.
DowK.CutterS. L. (2000). Public orders and personal opinions: Household strategies for hurricane risk assessment. Environmental Hazards, 2, 143-155.
21.
DrabekT. E. (1986). Human system responses to disaster: An inventory of sociological findings. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
22.
FieldA. P.GillettR. (2010). How to do meta-analysis. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 63, 665-694.
23.
FischerH. W. (2008). Response to disaster: Fact versus fiction & its perpetuation (3rd ed.). Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
24.
FishbeinM.AjzenA. (1975). Beliefs, attitudes, intentions, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading MA: Addison-Wesley.
25.
FishbeinM.AjzenI. (2010). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
GladwinC. H.GladwinH.PeacockW. G. (2001). Modeling hurricane evacuation decisions with ethnographic methods. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 19, 117-143.
28.
GladwinH.PeacockW. G. (1997). Warning and evacuation: A night for hard house. In PeacockW. G.MorrowB. H.GladwinH. (Eds.), Hurricane Andrew: Ethnicity, gender and sociology of disasters (Chapter 4, pp. 52-74). New York, NY: Routledge.
29.
GnanadesikanR. (1977). Methods for statistical data analysis of multivariate observations. New York, NY: John Wiley.
30.
GordonR. A. (1968). Issues in multiple regression. The American Journal of Sociology, 73, 592-616.
31.
GruntfestE.DowningT.WhiteG. F. (1978). Big Thompson flood exposes need for better flood reaction system. Civil Engineering, 78, 72-73.
32.
HuangS.-K.LindellM. K.PraterC. W.WuH.-C.SiebeneckL. (2012). Household evacuation decision making in response to Hurricane Ike. Natural Hazards Review, 13, 283-296.
33.
HunterJ. E.SchmidtF. L. (2004). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
34.
KangJ. E.LindellM. K.PraterC. S. (2007). Hurricane evacuation expectations and actual behavior in Hurricane Lili. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 881-897.
35.
KühbergerA.Schulte-MecklenbeckM.PernerJ. (1999). The effects of framing, reflection, probability, and payoff on risk preference in choice tasks. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 78, 204-231.
36.
KühbergerA.Schulte-MecklenbeckM.PernerJ. (2002). Framing decisions: Hypothetical and real. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89, 1162-1175.
37.
LazoJ. K.WaldmanD. M.MorrowB. H.ThacherJ. (2010). Household evacuation decision making and the benefits of improved hurricane forecasting: Developing a framework for assessment. Weather and Forecasting, 25, 207-219.
38.
LindellM. K. (2008). Cross-sectional research. In SalkindN. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of educational psychology (pp. 206-213). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39.
LindellM. K. (2012). Response to environmental disasters. In ClaytonS. (Ed.), Handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (pp. 391-413). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
40.
LindellM. K. (2013). Evacuation planning, analysis, and management. In BariruA. B.RaczL. (Eds.), Handbook of emergency response: A human factors and systems engineering approach (pp. 121-149). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
41.
LindellM. K. (2014). Judgment and decision making. In WebsterM.SellJ. (Eds.), Laboratory experiments in the social sciences (2nd ed., pp. 403-431). San Diego CA: Academic Press.
42.
LindellM. K.GeY.HuangS.-K.PraterC. S.WuH.-C.WeiH.-L. (2013). Behavioral study: Valley hurricane evacuation study, Willacy, Cameron, and Hidalgo Counties, Texas. College Station: Hazard Reduction & Recovery Center, Texas A&M University.
43.
LindellM. K.LuJ. C.PraterC. S. (2005). Household decision making and evacuation in response to Hurricane Lili. Natural Hazards Review, 6, 171-179.
44.
LindellM. K.PerryR. W. (1992). Behavioral foundations of community emergency planning. Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
45.
LindellM. K.PerryR. W. (2004). Communicating environmental risk in multiethnic communities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
46.
LindellM. K.PerryR. W. (2012). The protective action decision model: Theoretical modifications and additional evidence. Risk Analysis, 32, 616-632.
47.
LindellM. K.PraterC. S. (2007). Critical behavioral assumptions in evacuation time estimate analysis for private vehicles: Examples from hurricane research and planning [Special issue]. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 133, 18-29.
48.
LindellM. K.PraterC. S.PeacockW. G. (2007). Organizational communication and decision making in hurricane emergencies. Natural Hazards Review, 8, 50-60.
49.
LindellM. K.PraterC. S.SandersonW. G.Jr.LeeH. M.ZhangY.MohiteA.HwangS. N. (2001). Texas gulf coast residents’ expectations and intentions regarding hurricane evacuation. College Station: Texas A&M University Hazard Reduction & Recovery Center. Retrieved from www.txdps.state.tx.us/dem/downloadableforms.htm
50.
LindellM. K.SutterD. S.TrainorJ. E. (2013). Individual and household response to tornadoes. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 31, 373-383.
51.
LindellM. K.WhitneyD. J. (2000). Correlates of seismic hazard adjustment adoption. Risk Analysis, 20, 13-25.
52.
ListJ. A.GalletC. A. (2001). What experimental protocol influence disparities between actual and hypothetical values?Environmental & Resource Economics, 20, 241-254.
53.
MacKinnonD. P.FairchildA. J.FritzM. S. (2007). Mediation analysis. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 593-614.
54.
MeyerR.BroadK.OrloveB.PetrovicN. (2013). Dynamic simulation as an approach to understanding hurricane risk response: Insights from the Stormview Lab. Risk Analysis, 33, 1532-1552. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01935.x
55.
MiletiD. S.DrabekT.HaasJ. E. (1975). Human systems in extreme environments. Boulder: University of Colorado Institute of Behavioral Science.
56.
MiletiD. S.PeekL. (2000). The social psychology of public response to warnings of a nuclear power plant accident. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 75, 181-194.
57.
MiletiD. S.SorensenJ. H. (1990). Communication of emergency public warnings: A social science perspective and state-of-the-art assessment (No. ORNL-6609). Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
58.
Murray-TuiteP.WolshonB. (2013). Evacuation transportation modeling: An overview of research, development, and practice. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 27, 25-45.
59.
NisbettR. E.WilsonT. D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental process. Psychological Review, 84, 231-259.
60.
RiadJ. K.NorrisF. H.RubackR. B. (1999). Predicting evacuation in two major disasters: Risk perception, social influence, and access to resources. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 918-934.
61.
Sánchez-MecaJ.Marín-MartínezF. (1997). Homogeneity tests in meta-analysis: A Monte Carlo comparison of statistical power and Type I error. Quality & Quantity, 31, 385-399.
62.
SheeranP. (2002). Intention—Behavior relations: A conceptual and empirical review. European Review of Social Psychology, 12, 1-36.
63.
SmithS. K.McCartyC. (2009). Fleeing the storm(s): An examination of evacuation behavior during Florida’s 2004 hurricane season. Demography, 46, 127-145.
64.
SorensenJ. H. (2000). Hazard warning systems: Review of 20 years of progress. Natural Hazards Review, 1, 119-125.
65.
SorensenJ. H.SorensenB. V. (2007). Community processes: Warning and evacuation. In RodriguezH.QuarantelliE.RussellD. R. (Eds.), Handbook for disaster research (pp. 183-199). New York, NY: Springer.
66.
SteinR. M.Dueñas-OsorioL.SubramanianD. (2010). Who evacuates when hurricanes approach? The role of risk, information and location. Social Science Quarterly, 91, 816-834.
67.
TinsleyC. H.DillonR. L.CroninM. A. (2012). How near-miss events amplify or attenuate risky decision making. Management Science, 58, 1596-1613.
68.
Van WilligenM.EdwardsT.EdwardsB.HesseeS. (2002). Riding out the storm: Experiences of the physically disabled during Hurricanes Bonnie, Dennis, and Floyd. Natural Hazards Review, 3, 98-106.
69.
VuL.Van LandinghamM. J.DoM.BankstonC. L.III. (2009). Evacuation and return of Vietnamese New Orleanians affected by Hurricane Katrina. Organization Environment, 22, 422-436.
70.
WeiH.-L.LindellM. K.PraterC. S. (2014). “Certain death” from storm surge: A comparative study of Hurricanes Rita and Ike. Weather, Climate, and Society, 6, 425-433.
71.
WhiteheadJ.EdwardsB.Van WilligenM.MaioloJ.WilsonK.SmithK. (2000). Heading for higher ground: Factors affecting real and hypothetical hurricane evacuation behavior. Environmental Hazards, 2, 133-142.
72.
WilmotC. G.MeiB. (2004). Comparison of alternative trip generation models for hurricane evacuation. Natural Hazards Review, 5, 170-178.
73.
WuH.-C.LindellM. K.PraterC. S.SamuelsonC. D. (2014). Effects of track and threat information on judgments of hurricane strike probability. Risk Analysis, 34, 1025-1039.
74.
ZhangY.PraterC. S.LindellM. K. (2004). Risk area accuracy and evacuation from Hurricane Bret. Natural Hazards Review, 5, 115-120.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
