Emerging Voices in Natural Hazards Research

By Fernando I. Rivera

Emerging Voices in Natural Hazards Research provides a synthesis of the most pressing issues in natural hazards research by new professionals. The book begins with an overview of emerging research on natural hazards, such as hurricanes, earthquakes, floods, wildfires, sea-level rise, global warming, climate change, and tornadoes, among others. Remaining sections include topics such as socially vulnerable populations and the cycles of emergency management.

Emerging Voices in Natural Hazards Research is intended to serve as a consolidated resource for academics, students, and researchers to learn about the most pressing issues in natural hazard research today.

• Provides a platform for readers to keep up-to-date with the interdisciplinary research that new professionals are producing
• Covers the multidisciplinary perspectives of the hazards and disasters field
• Includes international perspectives from new professionals around the world, including developing countries

• Language: English
• Publisher: Elsevier Science
• Release date: Jun 7, 2019
• ISBN: 9780128162651

Book preview

affection.

Chapter 1

Bug out bags and first aid kits: Undergraduate college students' awareness, perceptions, preparedness, and behavior around severe weather

Christopher F. Labosier    Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Longwood University, Farmville, VA, United States

Abstract

Previous work has documented the hazard vulnerability of groups, including racial and ethnic minorities, the impoverished, the disabled, women, children, and the elderly. However, little work has been done addressing the vulnerability of undergraduate college students despite the significant emotional, physical, financial, and academic stress imposed on students by such events. This study seeks to understand how undergraduate college students respond to severe weather by examining risk perceptions, emergency preparedness, and behavior. An online survey instrument was distributed at a small, public, liberal arts university in the southeastern United States addressing these issues. Results demonstrate the unique vulnerability of this population as being generally unconcerned and unprepared for severe weather, and at times, overly confident. Survey responses indicate a population that lacks basic knowledge, and is trustful and heavily reliant on the university for safety and guidance. Future research priorities are identified along with basic recommendations for alleviating the vulnerabilities uncovered.

Keywords

Vulnerability; Risk; Higher education; College students; Hazardous weather; Emergency preparedness

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank the Office of Assessment and Institutional Research at Longwood University for their assistance in obtaining student email addresses. Thanks also to the undergraduate students who took the time and effort to complete the survey.

1.1 Introduction

Over the past two decades, several high-profile meteorological hazards have devastated college and university communities, including Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005, the Union University tornado in 2008, the southeast United States tornado outbreak in April 2011, Hurricane Sandy in 2012, the devastating floods from Hurricane Matthew in 2016, and Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria in 2017, to name a few. Such events pose significant emotional, psychological, physical, financial, and academic stress on undergraduate college students at affected higher education institutions. Additionally, administration, faculty, and staff at these institutions are tasked with recovery of the physical campus, maintaining communication with students, and continuing the semesters' activities, and presumably all while dealing with their own personal loss in these events (e.g. Beggan, 2010). Despite the unique situations that colleges and universities provide in regards to meteorological hazards, little research has been done to understand how students obtain, perceive, prepare for, and behave in these hazards. This study seeks to add to the nascent literature on universities and issues surrounding meteorological hazards.

The 23 million undergraduate college students in the United States in 2018 (National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 2018) represent a large vulnerable population, but one often unrecognized and rarely studied. As Simms et al. (2013) suggests, college students are vulnerable due to their youth and inexperience. They often rely heavily on parents and their respective university communities, perhaps even more so in emergency situations. Undergraduates may lack transportation, finances, knowledge, and awareness, making them susceptible to the impacts of natural hazards. Yet in other ways, college students may prove resilient in the face of natural hazards (Simms et al., 2013; Van Willigen et al., 2005). They lack property and possessions, are typically in good health, and possess a robust social network of family, friends, and classmates providing them some level of resiliency during disasters (Simms et al., 2013; Van Willigen et al., 2005). Despite the unique aspects of undergraduate college students, little research has emphasized risk communications, risk perceptions, emergency preparedness, and behaviors related to meteorological and other hazards among this group. The level of knowledge and awareness, risk perceptions, preparedness, and responses to hazards remain unclear as to how these facets interact with one another (e.g. how does level of hazard knowledge influence preparations). As such it is still not well understood if there are differences within this group and between this group and the general public, although Van Willigen et al. (2005) suggested that college students were more homogenous across subpopulations, relative to the general public. Most research to date has focused on seemingly more vulnerable populations, but unveiling this population's vulnerability has direct and significant consequences on higher education institutions and the communities in which college students reside during the academic year. By attempting to identify, and more importantly, address the vulnerabilities of the millions of college students now and into the future, society is made more resilient in the face of hazards and disasters.

1.1.1 Literature review

The concept of vulnerability has proven somewhat of an elusive term with multiple definitions provided over the decades (for an overview of these conceptions of vulnerability, see Cutter, 2006). Social vulnerability implies the potential for loss or losses to a particular social group as a result of a hazard or disaster (Cutter et al., 2006). Biophysical vulnerability refers to the environmental conditions of a place (e.g., coastal or floodplain locations) (Cutter, 2006). Ultimately, it is where these two broad categories of vulnerability intersect that provides the most complete picture of vulnerability. One of the core tenants of vulnerability research is the identification of what traits, characteristics, and conditions make people(s) vulnerable or resilient to a particular hazard of disaster (Cutter et al., 2006). With this framework in mind, what characteristics have been identified as making undergraduate students vulnerable to natural hazards? The following review examines the scientific literature on how students become aware and obtain severe weather information, their perceived risk of severe weather, the degree to which they are prepared for severe weather, and their response to severe weather.

There is little research that has been conducted on the sources of information that college students use to receive information about severe weather. Previous literature from the general public demonstrates that television is typically the most important method of hearing and learning about weather hazards (Morss and Hayden, 2010; Oakman et al., 2010), especially for tornado warnings (Chaney and Weaver, 2010; Comstock and Mallonee, 2005; Hammer and Schmidlin, 2002), although tornado sirens were also important in a study of Nebraska undergraduate students (Jauernic and Van Den Broeke, 2016, 2017). Other sources of information are key as well. After Hurricane Katrina, students and faculty alike sought information from a variety of sources regarding the status of their university, including the internet, the University website, and friends or relatives (Beggan, 2010). Television proved key in a tornado event at a major Mississippi university, but communication directly from the university was most prevalent through emergency alert text messaging (Sherman-Morris, 2010). However, these alert systems that rely on internet or cell technology are not necessarily always reliable during catastrophic events, resulting in large-scale power outages, as demonstrated by Hildebrand (2017) during Hurricane Sandy.

While receiving a warning is important, this is often insufficient to motivate actions, such as seeking shelter. Studies show that in addition to hearing warnings, confirming these risks with visual cues is also common (Chaney and Weaver, 2010; Jauernic and Van Den Broeke, 2016, 2017; Sherman-Morris, 2010). Upon hearing a warning, and sometimes visually confirming that warning, individuals often do seek shelter, although literature suggests that this can vary from event to event (Sherman-Morris, 2013). Demographic and socioeconomic variables, including gender, age, along with previous experience with hazards, demonstrate inconsistent relationships across hazards and studies (Comstock and Mallonee, 2005; Jauernic and Van Den Broeke, 2017; Kalkstein and Sheridan, 2007; Knocke and Kolivras, 2007; Schmidlin et al., 2009).

Understanding perceptions of risk is critical to understanding what potential actions individuals may take. However, little is known about how undergraduate college students perceive and respond to severe weather risk. The person-relative-to-event (PrE) theory suggests that individuals must perceive that they have the means and resources to adequately deal with a given threat, and that personal responsibility plays a large role in making these preparations (Mulilis and Duval, 1997; Mulilis et al., 2000, 2001). This notion of personal responsibility leading to preparedness activities may be critical in understanding how undergraduate students prepare or do not prepare for severe weather as college students are in the midst of a major life transition, moving from a period of limited responsibilities (as a child) to increasing responsibilities (as a young adult). Mulilis et al. (2001) found that college students need to feel that they have both choices and are highly committed to preparedness activities. Mulilis et al. (2000) demonstrated that undergraduate college students were less prepared for tornadoes than the general public, and that this may be attributable to students believing they have less choice (due to parents being responsible) and/or a lack of commitment, as students are pulled in other directions of college life.

Emergency preparedness is a critical step in creating hazard-resilient communities and individuals. Most research that has examined the level of preparedness for natural hazards among undergraduate college students suggests that this population is generally unprepared for a variety of events. A survey of college students at a large university in Florida found that at least 80% of participants had some degree of experience with hurricanes (Simms et al., 2013). However, this seemed to have little effect on their level of preparedness. Only 28% of participants reported having performed any sort of preparatory tasks (Simms et al., 2013). Simms et al. (2013) suggest that this group may possess a sense of invincibility and a cavalier attitude as a partial explanation. Likewise, students at a Midwestern university were also found to be unprepared for earthquakes and tornadoes and presented cynical attitudes about disasters in that there is nothing that they can do about them (Lovekamp and McMahon, 2011; Lovekamp and Tate, 2008). Students were, however, generally aware of their risks, but male students expressed little fear about those risks (Lovekamp and McMahon, 2011; Lovekamp and Tate, 2008). Interestingly, however, upon showing focus groups video coverage of the Union University tornado in 2008, researchers noted a shift in attitudes among students, particularly females (Lovekamp and McMahon, 2011). After witnessing the footage, students began to ask more questions and discuss preparedness and communications at their university (Lovekamp and McMahon, 2011).

Results are similar from an international perspective. Baytiyeh and Naja (2015) found Lebanese college students to be unprepared for earthquakes despite their high risk perception and the regions' biophysical vulnerability to such events. This and other studies point out that it is insufficient to simply have knowledge of a hazard regarding preparedness. Instead, individuals must believe that they have the knowledge, ability, and resources to successfully prepare for a given hazard (Lindell and Whitney, 2000; Whitney et al., 2004). Furthermore, Baytiyeh and Naja (2015) demonstrate that higher education institutions have missed an opportunity to foster a culture of hazard preparation both within their campus communities and the nation as a whole. Clearly, colleges and universities can and should play a larger role in educating and preparing their students and communities regarding natural hazards.

Additional research has examined the overall preparedness of colleges and universities for a variety of hazards and disasters, including those that are weather-related. In a survey of American universities, Mitroff et al. (2006) found few universities to be prepared. Similar results were found for Canadian colleges and universities (Friesen and Bell, 2006). Other studies have examined the response of universities to hazards (Beggan, 2010; Collins et al., 2008); improvements made in assessing risk (Human et al., 2006), and improved emergency operations through implementation of a geographic information system (Curtis et al., 2006).

This study explores how an often overlooked vulnerable population, undergraduate college students, respond to severe weather. As demonstrated above, there exists a knowledge gap in understanding how undergraduate college students respond to severe weather and hazards and disasters, in general, relative to the general public. By severe weather, this survey focused on severe thunderstorms, tornadoes, and associated hazards, such as hail and winds. Whereas flash flooding is also a potential hazard that accompanies thunderstorms and tornadoes, this work omits flash flooding as it is the subject of many research studies. The research presented here seeks to address the following questions: 1) How do students learn about severe weather alerts? 2) How do students perceive the risk of severe weather? 3) Are students prepared for severe weather? and 4) How do students behave during severe weather? An online survey was conducted at a small, public, liberal arts university in the southeastern United States to assess these issues.

This survey demonstrates that undergraduate college students are a vulnerable population in that they are generally unconcerned about severe weather, unprepared, lack critical knowledge, and rely heavily on the university community for their safety. However, the specific vulnerabilities identified here are addressable in a tangible way. Basic recommendations are made for potential approaches to address such vulnerabilities. The rest of the chapter proceeds as follows: the methodology is discussed, including development of the survey, data collection, and analysis. Each question above is followed by detailed results and a discussion of those results. Additionally, potential research priorities are identified to understand undergraduate students' response to natural hazards. Finally, a summary conclusion is provided.

1.2 Methodology

Survey instrument development was performed in the fall of 2016. Survey questions were developed asking respondents about various aspects of severe weather. Specifically, questions focused on four general themes: awareness of National Weather Service (NWS)-issued severe weather warnings and obtainment of severe weather alert information, perceptions of severe weather risk, severe weather preparedness, and behaviors or responses related to severe weather. Questions focused on student perceptions and behaviors during the period an undergraduate student is away from their respective home while at college. Survey development relied on previous instruments published in Lovekamp and Tate (2008), Lovekamp and McMahon (2011), and Simms et al. (2013).

Part 1 of the survey focused on respondents' awareness of NWS-issued severe thunderstorm or tornado warnings and asked respondents to identify the sources of these messages. Do you hear about severe weather alerts? Do you receive severe weather alerts on your smart phone? Additionally, survey respondents were asked from where they receive this information. Part 2 of the survey asked participants about their individual perceptions of risk related to severe weather. How concerned are you that severe weather could strike the campus and/or the community? Who is responsible for your safety during severe weather events? Part 3 of the survey focused on student preparation for severe weather. Example questions include asking participants to select the actions they have taken to prepare for severe weather and to identify barriers to severe weather preparation. Part 4 assessed behavior in the event of severe weather, both severe thunderstorm warnings and tornado warnings.

The survey instrument was constructed as a Google form and administered via email. Student email addresses were obtained through an official data request with the university's assessment office. Email addresses were limited to full-time, main campus, undergraduate students only. Student names, email addresses, or other identifying information were not collected as part of the survey. Participation was entirely voluntary, and no benefits were received from participating in the survey. Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was sought and obtained prior to data collection. Emails were sent to undergraduate students on November 14, 2016. The survey collected data from November 14 through November 21, 2016.

and 0.05 levels. Additionally, any open response questions were coded to highlight the primary themes. Individual quotes from student respondents are presented where appropriate.

1.3 Results

1.3.1 Characteristics of sample

The university where sampling occurred is a small, public, liberal arts university in the southeastern United States with a total enrollment of approximately 5000 students. The main campus is situated in a town of approximately 8000 people. A total of 3937 emails were sent out requesting students participation in the survey. A total of 561 students responded to the email and completed the majority of the survey. This represents an overall response rate of 14.2%, comparable to other studies involving undergraduate students (e.g., Sherman-Morris, 2010). Most student respondents were female (76%), slightly above the overall female majority campus population. All class ranks were relatively well represented, but skewed slightly towards upperclassmen with over 60% of respondents being either juniors (34%) or seniors (28%). A variety of disciplinary majors were represented in the survey, including the social sciences (28%), natural and physical sciences (17%), humanities and fine arts (14%), education (14%), allied health sciences (13%), business and economics (13%), and undeclared (2%). Finally, student respondents represented on-campus and off-campus living situations equally. On-campus housing includes university-owned residence halls and apartments. Students living off-campus generally live in apartments and houses adjacent to campus, and some students commute from surrounding communities.

1.3.2 Awareness and sources of severe weather alerts

) responded that they were unaware of severe weather alerts. ) said they did not. Further research is required to discern whether students did not want to receive severe weather alerts on their smartphones, or if they simply did not know how to enable their phones to receive these alerts.

Figure 1.1 Reported sources of severe weather information among survey participants ( n  = 503). Participants were asked to select all applicable sources. Other sources include primarily weather apps and notifications received via cell phones. Note: While the university has an outdoor warning system designed to notify anyone outside of any kind of emergency, there is no dedicated tornado warning siren at the university or in the community.

Because respondents were asked to select all sources of information that applied, it is also possible to get a sense of what proportion of students are searching for or receiving information from multiple sources. It is clear from Fig. 1.1 that there is no single key source of information. Instead, the undergraduate students sampled in this study use a multitude of sources in a confirmatory manner, with over 90% using at least two sources, 79% using at least three sources, and 63% reporting at least four sources of information. Similar results were found in a study of undergraduate students in Nebraska, with 90% receiving warnings from at least two sources of information (Jauernic and Van Den Broeke, 2016). However, it is not known if participants are regularly seeking all of these sources, or if these are simply possible sources of information that a student may encounter in the event of severe weather. It also seems likely that students are passively receiving this information, as opposed to actively seeking it out.

1.3.3 Perceptions of risk and responsibility

Participating students were asked about their perceptions of risk and concern related to severe weather. Overall, respondents expressed minimal levels of concern ().

Figure 1.2 Reported levels of concern among males ( n  = 126), females ( n  = 425), off-campus ( n  = 277), and on-campus ( n  = 278) students that severe weather (severe thunderstorms and tornadoes) could impact the campus and/or community. Statistical differences were uncovered between male and female students, but not between off-campus and on-campus students. Likert-scale question responses ranged from 1 (not concerned at all) to 5 (very concerned).

It is important to understand student perceptions of trust in the university as well. Responses can shed light on how much students rely on the university in emergency situations, such as severe weather. Students were asked if they trusted the university to provide them with timely information about severe weather (). It is possible that by being on campus a greater amount of time, the on-campus students have a better sense of emergency preparedness at the university.

Figure 1.3 Reported responses to what extent the students trust the university to provide timely information regarding severe weather among males ( n  = 126), females ( n  = 425), on off-campus ( n  = 277), and on-campus ( n  = 278) students. No statistical differences between either groups were uncovered. Likert-scale question responses ranged from 1 (no trust at all) to 5 (complete trust).

Figure 1.4 Reported responses among male ( n  = 126), female ( n  = 423), off-campus ( n  = 276), and on-campus ( n  = 277) students to how prepared they perceive the university is for severe weather events. No statistical differences between male and female students were uncovered, but there were statistical differences between off- and on-campus students. Likert-scale question responses ranged from 1 (completely unprepared) to 5 (very prepared).

Another approach to understand the unique vulnerability of college students is to ask about attribution of responsibility for safety during severe weather events. Students were asked who they attributed responsibility to for alerting them of severe weather and guiding them to safety when they are both off campus (Fig. 1.5) and on campus (Fig. 1.6). While off campus, the majority of students in any group perceived themselves as being responsible. Interestingly, however, 22% of males, 39% of females, 36% of off-campus students, and 34% of on-campus students indicated that all parties were responsible while they are off campus, and this includes university faculty and staff. When students are on campus, most either perceive all parties responsible or university faculty and staff as responsible. Based on these results, it appears that regardless of where students are located, they perceive responsibility for safety as a shared responsibility involving the University, and heavily so when they are on campus.

Figure 1.5 Reported responses among male ( n  = 126), female ( n  = 426), off-campus ( n  = 278), and on-campus ( n  = 278) students to attribution of responsibility for providing severe weather warnings and guiding them to a safe place while they are off campus. Other responses included parents and nobody is responsible.

Figure 1.6 Reported responses among male ( n  = 126), female ( n  = 426), off-campus ( n  = 278), and on-campus ( n  = 278) students to attribution of responsibility for providing severe weather warnings and guiding them to a safe place while they are on campus. Other responses included parents and nobody is responsible.

1.3.4 Preparedness

To discern students' overall level of preparedness for severe weather emergencies, survey participants were asked to rate their own level of severe weather preparedness on a scale from 1 (completely unprepared) to 5 (very prepared). ). Overall, all students presented themselves as moderately prepared for severe weather. Only a small percentage of students reported being completely unprepared for severe weather. This question was followed by a question asking participants to elaborate on the particular steps taken in their preparations.

Figure 1.7 Reported levels of personal preparedness for severe weather events among male ( n  = 125), female ( n  = 425), off-campus ( n  = 277), and on-campus ( n  = 277) students. Statistical differences were uncovered between male and female students, but not between off-campus and on-campus students. Likert-scale question responses ranged from 1 (completely unprepared) to 5 (very prepared).

Asking survey respondents about the specific tasks they have taken to prepare for severe weather tells a different story. Results are depicted in Table 1.1. Both male and female students reported having first aid kits and necessary prescription medications, staying up to date when severe weather is expected, and having flashlights with spare batteries. These results are similar to those found elsewhere (Lovekamp and McMahon, 2011; Lovekamp and Tate, 2008). Few, however, knew the locations of appropriate shelters (42% for males and 39% for females), and even fewer had established any kind of emergency plan in the event of severe weather (28% for males and 17% for females). This is in line with Simms et al. (2013), which found only 29% of college students had a hurricane evacuation plan, and 12% responded that they would not evacuate at all. However, Jauernic and Van Den Broeke (2017) showed that the majority of students from the Great Plains had an emergency or safety plan in place, probably reflective of the frequency with which tornadoes impact the region. The percentage of preparation tasks accomplished was similar for on- and off-campus students. Survey respondents were also provided the option of free responses to add any additional comments. Comments include the following:

Table 1.1

Reported severe weather emergency preparedness tasks accomplished among male (n = 119), female (n = 407), off-campus (n = 266), and on-campus (n = 264) survey participants. Participants were asked to select all applicable tasks/skills.

[I have a] basic understanding of what to do in severe weather (i.e., during tornadoes to find a place without windows).

Female student living on campus

[I] have candles when the power goes out.

Female student living off campus

Make sure I have gas in the car and grill.

Female student living off campus

I carry a large ‘bug-out’ bag in my vehicle at all times.

Male student living off campus

Respondents were given the option of addressing why they did not do more to prepare or prepare at all for severe weather. Fig. 1.8 depicts the percentage of responses per various barrier to preparation (male students versus female students). Common barriers among male students include financial constraints (35%), time constraints (29%), and perceiving severe weather as not something to be concerned about or necessary to be prepared for (25%). Female students viewed a lack of knowledge on how best to prepare as the greatest constraint (42%), followed by time (30%), and cost (24%). A smaller percentage of both groups responded in a more fatalistic manner by suggesting that there is nothing they can do about severe weather (14% for males and 17% for females), so preparation does not matter. Lovekamp and McMahon (2011) also found pessimistic and fatalistic attitudes in students surveyed in a Midwest university. Additionally, some responded that it is inconvenient or that preparation is not important, possibly suggesting that students have not personalized risk, and so, are unconcerned about taking any preparation measures. Respondents also mentioned additional barriers with the vast majority responding that they had never thought about being prepared for severe weather or that severe weather is rare, so their preparations are not worth the time and effort. Whereas only a small percentage of the female group responded that it is not their responsibility, it is noteworthy that one respondent noted that, University staff are trained for it [severe weather], implying that the students will depend heavily on the university in severe weather events, and likely in other emergency situations as well.

Figure 1.8 Reported barriers to beginning to prepare or doing more to prepare for severe weather emergencies among male ( n  = 52) and female ( n  = 205) survey participants. Participants were asked to select all applicable barriers. Other responses included not having thought about emergency preparedness in general and not perceiving severe weather to happen.

In order to gather more insight on those students who perceived themselves as unprepared for severe weather emergencies, this groups' reported barriers were analyzed in isolation. for females), the results are slightly different from the overall sample. Unprepared males suggested that preparations were inconvenient (25%), whereas only 13% and 6%, respectively, suggested that cost and knowledge were barriers to preparations. Self-reporting unprepared females still suggested that knowledge (29%), and time (23%) were hurdles to doing more to prepare.

Table 1.2

An option was also provided for respondents to provide open-ended responses to this question. A common theme among these free responses was the perception that severe weather is not something they think about, or that they will deal with it as needed. A small number of students did express a desire to be more prepared, and an interest in learning more about how to do that.

If severe weather were to be a possible threat I would cross that bridge when I get to it. Obviously, I'm not going to sit around and let a tornado take me away nor am I going to starve to death because there's a storm. You gotta adjust to your situation.

Male student living on campus

Honestly haven't thought about it.

Female student living off campus

I honestly have not thought about it, but [I] am now considering.

Female student living off campus

It's never been a big issue, so I don't think much into it.

Female student living on campus

1.3.5 Behavior around severe weather

The final portion of the survey asked respondents to consider what they would do in the event of severe weather. It is difficult to ascertain how exactly undergraduate college students or any other group would actually respond during an emergency event. Case studies, such as Sherman-Morris (2010), can help elucidate actual actions taken during such events. It is still informative to at least understand what college students think they would do in the event of severe weather.

First, students were asked to think about the buildings they most frequent on campus, such as residence halls, classroom buildings, and the dining hall. With those places in mind, students were asked if they know where to take shelter in the event of severe weather. Most students either only knew where to take shelter in some buildings or responded that they did not know where to take shelter in any of these buildings () of off-campus students reported knowing where to take shelter in all buildings. It should be noted that this survey does not assess whether or not students responding yes or some do in fact know where to take shelter.

Figure 1.9 Reported responses to knowledge of appropriate shelter locations in commonly occupied buildings (e.g., residence halls, classroom buildings, dining hall, etc.) for male ( n  = 126), female ( n  = 425), off-campus ( n  = 277), and on-campus ( n  = 278) students. Responses included, Yes, all buildings, No, none of the buildings, and Some of the buildings.

Survey respondents were then asked what actions they would take in the event of a severe thunderstorm warning and a tornado warning. ) of students said they would either wait until the severe thunderstorm was imminent and certain, or would do nothing. Male students also responded with the highest rate (15%) of saying that they would do nothing upon learning of a severe thunderstorm warning.

Figure 1.10 Reported responses to the question, What would you do in the event of a severe thunderstorm warning (or tornado warning) while you were on campus? among all students ( n  = 555 for severe thunderstorm warning and n  = 554 for tornado warning).

) responded that they would wait for university faculty or staff to provide guidance. No respondents replied that they would do nothing in a tornado warning, suggesting that students do know the difference between thunderstorms and tornadoes in terms of potential threat, severity, and impact.

1.4 Discussion

Undergraduate college students at a small, public liberal arts university were surveyed about how they obtain severe weather information, perceive their personal risk of severe weather, prepare for severe weather emergencies, and behave in the event of severe weather. Students responded that they are largely aware of NWS-issued severe weather warnings, receive this information from a variety of sources, including both personal networks, internet and social media, and traditional media, such as television. Additionally, students use smartphones to receive many of these severe weather alerts.

Highlighting undergraduate college students' vulnerability, results suggest that students are generally unconcerned, unprepared, and rely heavily on the university in the event of severe weather hazards. In particular, male students expressed statistically significant lower levels of concern that severe weather could impact their campus and the surrounding community. At the same time, males had statistically higher perceptions of their own preparedness, despite showing no significant differences from female students in accomplishing certain preparation tasks or knowledge. For instance, a large percentage both males and females did not know where to take shelter and did not have an emergency plan, arguably two of the most important steps to be taken in the event of severe weather. Furthermore, students trust the university to provide them with timely alerts and information regarding severe weather, and believe that their university is prepared to deal with severe weather events. However, it is not simply trust and belief in the university, but many students view the university as responsible for their individual safety. Whereas some did acknowledge personal responsibility, many reported that university faculty and staff are responsible for their safety, both on campus and off.

There seems to be disconnect between student perceptions of their own preparedness and their actual preparedness, something previous studies have also demonstrated (Lovekamp and McMahon, 2011; Lovekamp and Tate, 2008; Simms et al., 2013). Overall, it appears that the survey respondents in this study are generally unprepared for severe weather emergencies. This is despite the fact that most perceived themselves as at least somewhat prepared for severe weather, particularly male students. Whereas the majority of students responded with having made some basic preparations, these preparations were generally common items like first aid kits, prescription medications, flashlights, and simply being attentive on days when severe weather is possible. These items and actions are certainly important, but it is not clear if students took such steps in direct response to emergency preparedness. Only a small percentage of students knew where appropriate shelters were located or had any sort of emergency plan, a point that should be especially concerning for university faculty, staff, and administrators. For those that did have an emergency plan, it is unclear what that plan consisted of and whether or not it was an appropriate and complete plan. This overconfidence in perceived preparation and lack of actual preparedness is in line with other studies asking college students about emergency preparedness in hurricanes (Simms et al., 2013) and tornadoes (Lovekamp and McMahon, 2011; Lovekamp and Tate, 2008). Interestingly, most students surveyed in Lovekamp and Tate (2008) indicated that they were unprepared for earthquakes.

Numerous barriers prevent student respondents from preparing for the possibility of severe weather. In fact, many students responded with multiple barriers. Not surprisingly with undergraduate students, time and money are two of the most common barriers. However, the most frequent response among females was not understanding what to do to prepare for severe weather. This represents a possible opportunity for colleges and universities to have knowledgeable faculty, staff, and local emergency management officials to lead workshops on severe weather preparations. Some respondents also perceive severe weather in such a way that they believe that there is nothing they can do to prepare and/or that preparations are unimportant. This may be the result of a lack of knowledge and experience with severe weather.

Especially troubling in this survey is the significant proportion of students who do not know where appropriate shelters are located in commonly occupied buildings. Supporting this is the small percentage of students who listed knowledge of appropriate shelter locations as an emergency preparation task they had completed. Again, this represents a relatively simple opportunity for the university to engage students in teaching the very basics of emergency preparedness and safety in the event of severe weather. For instance, faculty could include this information in course syllabi, and university staff could address this with incoming freshman during orientation events. To know where to seek shelter in commonly occupied buildings is typically a relatively simple thing to learn, and would likely go a long way in ensuring student safety on campus.

Previous work suggests that if individuals already believe themselves prepared for a given hazard, then they will be less likely to concern themselves with taking further preparation actions (Lindell and Whitney, 2000). Additionally, individuals must believe and take ownership of their own personal responsibility, in addition to believing that they have the necessary resources to prepare themselves before actions are taken (PrE theory previously mentioned in Mulilis et al., 2001). The college students surveyed in this study do not prepare for severe weather and are at least partially lacking in knowledge (e.g. shelter locations, emergency plans, severe weather preparations, etc.) because they do not see this issue as fully their responsibility due to a perceived lack of choice and/or commitment (Figs. 1.5 and 1.6), do not know how to prepare and/or lack time and finances (i.e., lack resources) (Tables 1.1 and 1.2, Fig. 1.8), and perceive themselves as already prepared (Fig. 1.7).

Finally, while more research is needed to present a clearer picture, it is possible that traditional views of vulnerability claiming that females are the most vulnerable may not always be the case in regard to this special population. It is argued here that college students, in general, are a vulnerable population. But in particular, males were statistically less concerned about severe weather and confident in their preparations; yet it appears that this confidence is misplaced. Results suggest that most do not have an emergency plan, do not know where appropriate shelters are located, and are no more prepared than female students. Students in general, but males in particular, may be expressing optimism bias. Other studies have indicated that students demonstrate optimism bias in assessing their own personal risk (Jauernic and Van Den Broeke, 2016). Male college students may feel pressure to conform to stereotypes by presenting themselves as unafraid, confident, and knowledgeable, but more research is