Is there a psychology behind people's personal interpretations of forecasts, which favours their personal objectives? Put another way, for example: if you're planning on a trip to a caving area where water levels are critically important and you have several weather forecasts which tend to be vague at best or at odds with each other, is it a general tendency for people to select the weather forecast that best favours their intentions?

E.g. I'm going to the Dales for some caving; two weather forecasts predict heavy rain (which would be bad) but another one predicts drizzle; do I go to a flood-prone cave while clutching a print out of the drizzle forecast, a lucky rabbit's foot, and a dried up piece of seaweed? If I do, am I fulfilling some kind of psychological theory? If so, does it have a name?

It doesn't appear to match with the Dunning-Kruger effect, which seems to explain quite a lot of other stuff.

Maybe its the "kudos" of getting out of somewhere like sell gill in flood :s

As it happens some of us (want) to get flooded into peak cavern so we can see what the water does!

Your description of that approach doesn't match my way of thinking at least. I'm by no means a "glass half empty" person but I tend to go by the worst case scenario. Then again I live close to most of the caving projects I'm involved with, so it's easier for me to pick and choose to some extent - go to each when conditions are at an optimum.

I can understand the dilemma of a club having travelled a long way though and wanting to go ahead with plans. But this has been a major factor in many flooding incidents over the years. Perhaps none of us should forget that important aspect of planning - include a "Plan B"!

I remember standing on the bridge by the LNRC sink in S. Wales. Clear blue sky & the divers muttering "Looks like rain, let's go to the pub."

Well, there was no point in us sherpas going underground if there was nothing to carry, was there ...

I think Pitlamp's point about having travelled a fair distance tends to make people take greater risks.

The same situation can be seen for example, when winter climbing in Scotland. If there are warnings of bad weather or risk of avalanche, locals will probably be more inclined to give the day's climbing a miss whereas someone who has travelled all the way from the Southeast might be more inclined to go ahead anyway.

I tend to make sure I know up to date forecasts from the Met Office, and do not necessarily take much heed to other sources which either rely on computer generated summaries or symbols. As a tame example, last weekend most sources were saying Sunday was going to be a miserable, wild, and wet day. I was planning a day in the open, taking a roman kiln apart brick by brick. However, for at least 24 hours or more before the day, the predicted progress of the rain front from the met office showed it would stay dry until early afternoon. Sure enough, I managed to get on with the task in the dry until about 14:30. The first couple of hours were actually lovely and sunny, with only the breeze slowly picking up. You may have three or four forecasts to choose from, but for me, if the Met Office is predicting heavy rain, but other sites are saying light showers, or similar, I'll always take heed of the Met Office.

Pitlamp said:

I can understand the dilemma of a club having travelled a long way though and wanting to go ahead with plans. But this has been a major factor in many flooding incidents over the years. Perhaps none of us should forget that important aspect of planning - include a "Plan B"!

Click to expand...

Interesting point, do the flood related call outs in any area bear any correlation to visiting clubs??

It's not easy to do a correlation because of questions over where you draw the line between a visiting club and a local one. But I'm sure you appreciate that, having gone to a lot of effort to organise something that can only really happen on a certain day, might result in temptation. I can certainly remember rescues when it was a likely factor.

As far as I can tell with recent forcasts such as the one Dunc was talking about on the other thread,  are not worth the paper they are written on until 24 hours or indeed the day in question. He did not want to come on the trip as 24 hours earlier it lots of showers, but I thought it was not enough to flood Rift anyway, but still it was sort of hit and miss, so I made the decision to turn up and see what its like on the day. The new forcast was for hardly any rain, so I was not taking a risk.

As Dunc having a longer drive he did not want to take the risk (though I guess he could have looked at the forcast in the morning, but a lie in is a lie in lol).

"Quick lads, let's get underground before it starts raining!" 

Comment made on numerous wet trips and only one "prolonged" trip.  :spank:






Disclaimer: Not a serious recommendation.

The statistically proven most accurate forecast is easy:

The weather in the next hour will be the same as the weather in the previous hour.

Click to expand...

The problem with that is that it is of limited use...

Although the long term forecast is for more changeable weather...

Mike

Alex said:

As far as I can tell with recent forcasts such as the one Dunc was talking about on the other thread,  are not worth the paper they are written on until 24 hours or indeed the day in question.

Click to expand...

Very much so. In fact today (at 6am and 8am), the BBC weather website claimed I would enjoy a few hours of sunshine, then sunny intervals, then cloud. At around 10am I spent 30 minutes in the rain, must have been that liquid sunshine. I'm not sure I even enjoyed any sunshine. And when I was being wet-sunshined on I checked the MetOffice (mobile site) who claimed cloud, certainly no mention of showers either.

He did not want to come on the trip as 24 hours earlier it lots of showers,

Click to expand...

More than showers from what I saw, but that's beside the point.