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.
Why so much ridicule for this paper? There is no link provided to it but I can only assume it was published in some sort of social science journal. It obviously not climatology and shouldn’t be judged as if it was.
As to the change from all female to alternating gender names, the only problem is that storm intensity may have lowered over the decades – again assuming they aren’t climatologists this isn’t a huge problem.
Then there is the judgment that this is a waste of money – but compared to what? Compared to many papers in social sciences such as gender studies, social geography, etc this could be judged quite a good spend in that it could result in less deaths.
Do people think the issue behind the study – inequality in our perception of gender roles – is a non-issue or just not relevant here?
This research is so important and vital to our future existence that I just wish there were a way to fund this type of work directly instead of it coming from the general tax fund. SARC
—
Even with climate change increasing the frequency and severity of storms,
—
Is that quoted from the article? While some predict such for the future, there is no established evidence that there has been a long term increasing trend (at least back to 1900) in global cyclonic frequency nor ACE
Saren says:
June 3, 2014 at 8:00 am
Why so much ridicule for this paper?
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
Hurricane Hillary seems pretty scary to me…
@Bill Hutto
At this point, what does it matter?
OK, so I nominate the following names to be used for female storms:
C –> Cruella
M –> Malificent
L –> Lucretia (or do too few people know L. Borgia?)
Other letters/names?
@Bob Shapiro
E – Esmeralda.
“Why so much ridicule for this paper? There is no link provided to it but I can only assume it was published in some sort of social science journal.”
It’s in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
I think they should name them after the monsters in Japanese horror movies. I think if they went far enough down in the list they could mine up an entire pantheon of such names.
Or why not serial numbers: 2014-1, 2014-2?
The main point here is the waste of taxpayer dollars, money taken by force from hard working people to pay for garbage research like this. The slim statistical correlation between hurricane names and deaths (23 vs. 29) is meaningless.
That said, if hurricane Megatron is heading my way, I’m running.
Saren says:
June 3, 2014 at 8:00 am
Junk science is junk science. & stupid people are funny & should be mocked.
Also, there’s this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_deadliest_Atlantic_hurricanes
Perhaps begin naming hurricanes after government agencies (ATF, DEA, IRS): surely that would encourage people to flee.
Btw, was in Biloxi, MS (Keesler AFB) during Camille. I don’t recall any time spent discussing gender implications before, during, or after the storm. I do recall a lot of fear and, afterwards, stunned amazement.
Bill Hutto wins.
“It’s time for androgyny. It’s Pat”
http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/06/03/are_hurricanes_named_after_women_more_dangerous_not_so_fast.html
@Robert Fair enough. I guess my point isn’t whether or not this is good money spent, but from a women’s studies/gender studies/sociology perspective the topic seems relevant. If this is a bad use of money then so is the entire subject of women’s studies. Personally I would rather not pay _any_ taxes on any education (being an anarchist/libertarian-type) than worry about how it’s spent.
@Stark I’m not defending the science in this paper – by all accounts it’s seriously lacking. My impression is that there is lots of the ridicule being laid to the entire premise not just the science.
And the weather service has warned us to brace ourselves for the onslaught of Hurricane Barbara. And if you think naming a destructive storm after a woman is sexist, you obviously have never seen the gals grabbing for items at a clearance sale.
Got to love the Simpsons.
Greg says:
June 3, 2014 at 7:07 am
This study actually proves that increasing CO2 results in fewer hurricane deaths, since there was more death when only female names were used, and CO2 was at its ‘ideal level’
—————————————————————————————————————————-
Actually, yes. Global Climate Models project that in a “warmer world” there will be fewer tropical cyclones. And in paleotemptology studies tropical cyclone activity was nearly twice as high during the Little Ice Age. So, more Carbon Dioxide please.;)
It’s time to bring back the neutercane.
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/tcfaq/A18.html
Madhu Viswanathan, a professor of marketing at Illinois; affiliation as noted in the paper at PNAS = “Women and Gender in Global Perspectives, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, Champaign, IL”
Well good – no agenda there then!
Having survived a hurricane I’d surmise that whether someone evacuates or not depends on experience of surviving a hurricane and ability to evacuate. If another hurricane comes my way I’m getting out of town no matter what its name is.
Hurricane preparedness is a bit of a misnomer. Other than boarding up windows and putting out sandbags there’s not a lot you can do. All that stuff about batteries, water, food etc is for post-hurricane waiting for normal service to resume, if you survived, after you were foolish enough not to evacuate.
“Tis pity this was published in PNAS since it seems to have nothing to do with science.
“Too stupid to live” really should be a valid diagnosis. >:-(
Let’s see the current temperature anomalies in the Pacific. In May decreased from April.
This is different than in 1997.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/ocean/index/heat_content_index.txt
Chris Moffat:
Hurricane preparedness means maintaining your sea walls and dikes. New Orleans is an example of what happens when you neglect such precautions. The Dutch in the Netherlands do this: Watcher, Dreamer. and Sleeper.
Well, it is Illinois.
That paper should be put in the TOTALLY WASTED TAXPAYER MONEY file in the library and cross referenced in the EXAMPLES OF THE DUMBING DOWN OF THE AMERICAN EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM.
Meh, I think I lost 13 IQ points just reading that, and I REALLY can’t afford to lose any more.
Well. If you buy the study, then they have a few choices in front of them. Stop naming storms with female names, in order to save more lives, or embrace whatever ideology would keep them using female names for storms. The third option would be to believe the study is somehow flawed or a statistical apparition. I see they chose option #3, but it has a hint of #2 in it.