From the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and the department of bad baby names, something sure to piss off somebody, somewhere.
In the coming Atlantic hurricane season, watch out for hurricanes with benign-sounding names like Dolly, Fay or Hanna. According to a new article from a team of researchers at the University of Illinois, hurricanes with feminine names are likely to cause significantly more deaths than hurricanes with masculine names, apparently because storms with feminine names are perceived as less threatening.
An analysis of more than six decades of death rates from U.S. hurricanes shows that severe hurricanes with a more feminine name result in a greater death toll, simply because a storm with a feminine name is seen as less foreboding than one with a more masculine name. As a result, people in the path of these severe storms may take fewer protective measures, leaving them more vulnerable to harm.
The finding indicates an unfortunate and unintended consequence of the gendered naming of hurricanes, which has important implications for policymakers, meteorologists, the news media and the public regarding hurricane communication and preparedness, the researchers say.
“The problem is that a hurricane’s name has nothing to do with its severity,” said Kiju Jung, a doctoral student in marketing in the U. of I.’s College of Business and the lead author on the study.
“Names are assigned arbitrarily, based on a predetermined list of alternating male and female names,” he said. “If people in the path of a severe storm are judging the risk based on the storm’s name, then this is potentially very dangerous.” The research, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, examined actual hurricane fatalities for all storms that made landfall in the U.S. from 1950-2012, excluding Hurricane Katrina (2005) and Hurricane Audrey (1957) because they were much deadlier than the typical storm.
The authors found that for highly damaging storms, the more feminine the storm’s name, the more people it killed. The team’s analysis suggests that changing a severe hurricane’s name from the masculine “Charley” to the feminine “Eloise” could nearly triple its death toll.
“In judging the intensity of a storm, people appear to be applying their beliefs about how men and women behave,” said Sharon Shavitt, a professor of marketing at Illinois and a co-author of the report. “This makes a female-named hurricane, especially one with a very feminine name such as Belle or Cindy, seem gentler and less violent.”
In a follow-up set of experiments, Jung and his colleagues examined how the gender of names directly affected people’s judgments about storms. They found that people who were asked to imagine being in the path of “Hurricane Alexandra” (or “Christina” or “Victoria”) rated the storm as less risky and intense compared to those asked to imagine being in the path of “Hurricane Alexander” (or “Christopher” or “Victor”).
“This is a tremendously important finding. Proof positive that our culturally grounded associations steer our steps,” said Hazel Rose Markus, a professor in behavioral sciences at Stanford University, who was not involved in the research. Hurricanes in the U.S. formerly were given only female names, a practice that meteorologists of a different era considered appropriate given the unpredictable nature of the storms. According to the paper, an alternating male-female naming system was adopted in the late 1970s because of increased societal awareness of sexism.
(The names of this year’s storms, alternating between male and female names, will start with Arthur, Bertha, Cristobal and Dolly.) Even though the “gender” of hurricanes is pre-assigned and arbitrary, the question remains: Do people judge hurricane risks in the context of gender-based expectations?
“People imagining a ‘female’ hurricane were not as willing to seek shelter,” Shavitt said. “The stereotypes that underlie these judgments are subtle and not necessarily hostile toward women – they may involve viewing women as warmer and less aggressive than men.”
“Such gender biases are pervasive and implicit,” said Madhu Viswanathan, a professor of marketing at Illinois and a co-author of the study. “We found that people were affected by the gender of hurricane names regardless of whether they explicitly endorsed the idea that women and men have different traits. This appears to be a widespread phenomenon.”
Hurricanes kill more than 200 people in the U.S. each year, and severe hurricanes are capable of producing casualties in the thousands, according to the paper. Even with climate change increasing the frequency and severity of storms, hurricane preparedness remains a challenge for officials.
Although the negative effect of gender stereotypes is well-known in hiring decisions and other evaluations of women and men, this research is the first to demonstrate that gender stereotypes can have deadly consequences.
Joseph Hilbe, of Arizona State University, also was a co-author of the paper.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Hell hath no fury like a female hurricane scorned.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropical_cyclone_naming
Lots of names are allocated on the basis of where the huricanes start, and that’s gender specific.
If the strongest storms originate in an area with female names, you have the simple explanation.
So if we start calling them “Butch” and “Vlarg, the Destroyer of Worlds”, it’ll save lives? What are we waiting for? 😉
So, let’s see, we want all hurricanes to be named, Thor, Zeus, Arnold, Adolf, Joseph (Stalin), Mao, Jeffrey (Dalmer), or Napoleon.
“An analysis of more than six decades of …a follow-up set of experiments…”
Their conclusion appears to be observational based, a step in the right direction?
People are told a lot more than a name; importantly they’re told the intensity, so are people going to prepare less for category 5 Tabatha than category 5 Achilles? I don’t see it, not when lives are at stake. Also consider how noisy the data is – deaths, which don’t usually occur in large numbers so especially noisy. And how subjective is name femininity?
Dave A is correct. As far as I can tell, no one I know down here on the Gulf coast cares what the name is – they care what is the category, the predicted storm surge and likely path.
Has it been 6 decades since they started using male names for half of the Hurricanes? Perhaps there are more deaths from feminine Hurricanes because they were all feminine back when more people were killed by hurricanes.
“Even with climate change increasing the frequency and severity of storms, hurricane preparedness remains a challenge for officials.” Even with the longest recorded pause in landfalling hurricanes, real-world data remains a challenge for climate researchers.
“On the Sixth Day, God created man. On the Seventh Day, God rested.
On the Eighth Day, God created woman, and since then, neither God nor man has rested.”
“An analysis of more than six decades of”
Prior to about 20 years ago, all storms had women’s names.
Right of the bat, their study is garbage.
Perhaps they are measuring a long term decrease in storm deaths, which would make sense given the increase in tracking and prediction.
I’m curious if they omitted the two most fatal male named hurricanes or is this acceptable cherry picking?
As to the rest of it …………. Darwin awards all round please, if you think a hurricane isn’t dangerous because of its name you need to get out the pool.
Thanks, Elftone! That was worth a chuckle. Ditto Mark Hladik (and I’m a woman). Good to start the day with the zesty humor of WUWT-ers…
So only female names were used for Atlantic Hurricanes between 1953 and 1977, after that alternate male and female names were used. Has this study accounted for this?
Except there is insufficient data – the bane of all whacko climate theories.
Damn, paywalled…
CLR II says:
“Has it been 6 decades since they started using male names for half of the Hurricanes? “
No, female names were exclusively used from 1953 to 1978.
http://www.gohsep.la.gov/factsheets/WhyHurricanesAreNamed.htm
Soooo, “they” spent money studying this … I want to go back to sleep and never wake up again …
Yeah, well… Kipling called it.
But still, “Hurricane Obama” would scare the bejeezus outa me.
hurricanes with feminine names are likely to cause significantly more deaths than hurricanes with masculine names, apparently because storms with feminine names are perceived as less threatening.
So only perception is the inverse cause of severity, another basis for anthro-spawned calamity.
Reminds me of the ageless wisdom of the Firesign Theater, “What you don’t think, can’t hurt you.”
A critique here, to which the authors have replied in comments:
http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2014/06/02/why-have-female-hurricanes-killed-more-people-than-male-ones/
Confusing cause and effect and seeing patterns in random events is one of the hallmarks of pseudo science such as global warming.
the more feminine the storm’s name, the more people it killed.
============
this makes perfect sense. hurricane landfalls are decreasing. male names have only been used recently. what you have is the effects of a decreasing trend on two samples of different lengths.
the shorter sample will appear on average to be lower, simply because its average is more recent (thus contains mostly lower data points)
What you have is researchers with a poor understanding of trends and averages.
The real outrage here is that these nonsense research reports are the product of overpaid faculty/staff from public universities who are bankrupting America’s parents and students with exorbitant tuition and fees…
Kiju Jung, a doctoral student in marketing – lead author.
Sharon Shavitt, a professor of marketing – co-author.
Madhu Viswanathan, a professor of marketing – co-author.
Enough said.