letters to the editor

letters to the editor Comment s on "Operational Omission 1) Trace events such as flurries and drizzle and 2) POPs are optional when precipitation is occurring an d Misuse of Numerical Precipitation or imminent, when warnings are issued, or when Probability Expressions": Part I the forecast areas are huge. Vislocky et al. (1995) present an interesting and Perhaps a reluctance of operational forecasters to thought provoking look at the numerical "probability of include specific, numerical POP statements in the precipitation" (hereafter referred to as POP) state- forecasts stems from a widespread perception that ments in National Weather Service (NWS) forecasts. the public does not understand these expressions. The authors appear to be strong proponents of the Curtis and Murphy (1985) have some empirical evi- inclusion of POP statements in public forecasts and dence to indicate that "interested" people in the gen- their utility. Their criticism of the inconsistent usage of eral public do not understand POP statements, POPs has merit and can stimulate discussion as to the whether properly or improperly expressed. Sink (1995) proper usage of these expressions. presents compelling evidence that there is confusion in understanding POPs in public forecasts throughout As an NWS forecaster who writes forecasts that a diverse http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society American Meteorological Society

letters to the editor

Loading next page...
 
/lp/ams/letters-to-the-editor-DTOZ0gQiMg
Publisher
American Meteorological Society
Copyright
Copyright © American Meteorological Society
ISSN
1520-0477
D.O.I.
10.1175/1520-0477-76.10.1812
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Comment s on "Operational Omission 1) Trace events such as flurries and drizzle and 2) POPs are optional when precipitation is occurring an d Misuse of Numerical Precipitation or imminent, when warnings are issued, or when Probability Expressions": Part I the forecast areas are huge. Vislocky et al. (1995) present an interesting and Perhaps a reluctance of operational forecasters to thought provoking look at the numerical "probability of include specific, numerical POP statements in the precipitation" (hereafter referred to as POP) state- forecasts stems from a widespread perception that ments in National Weather Service (NWS) forecasts. the public does not understand these expressions. The authors appear to be strong proponents of the Curtis and Murphy (1985) have some empirical evi- inclusion of POP statements in public forecasts and dence to indicate that "interested" people in the gen- their utility. Their criticism of the inconsistent usage of eral public do not understand POP statements, POPs has merit and can stimulate discussion as to the whether properly or improperly expressed. Sink (1995) proper usage of these expressions. presents compelling evidence that there is confusion in understanding POPs in public forecasts throughout As an NWS forecaster who writes forecasts that a diverse

Journal

Bulletin of the American Meteorological SocietyAmerican Meteorological Society

Published: Oct 1, 1995

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 12 million articles from more than
10,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Unlimited reading

Read as many articles as you need. Full articles with original layout, charts and figures. Read online, from anywhere.

Stay up to date

Keep up with your field with Personalized Recommendations and Follow Journals to get automatic updates.

Organize your research

It’s easy to organize your research with our built-in tools.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve Freelancer

DeepDyve Pro

Price
FREE
$49/month

$360/year
Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed
Create lists to
organize your research
Export lists, citations
Read DeepDyve articles
Abstract access only
Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles
Print
20 pages/month
PDF Discount
20% off