Redesigned Hurricane Maps Help People Spot Inland Risk, Study Finds

Researchers at Florida State University (FSU) tested an experimental hurricane forecast graphic from the National Hurricane Center (NHC) that adds inland tropical storm and hurricane watches and warnings to the familiar track-forecast “cone of uncertainty,” which has traditionally emphasized coastal threats. The NHC introduced the redesigned graphic in 2024 to make hazards such as flooding, tornadoes and damaging winds farther inland more visible. The findings appear in the American Meteorological Society journal Weather, Climate, and Society.

Faculty from FSU’s School of Communication and Department of Geography showed participants in Florida and Georgia either the traditional coastal-only cone — used for Hurricane Ian, which made landfall in September 2022 — or the new version with inland information added. Lead author Elizabeth Ray, an FSU assistant professor, said the National Hurricane Center had made thoughtful changes to improve how hurricane information is communicated, and the researchers wanted to know whether those changes actually helped people understand the risk the graphic showed them.

People shown the revised graphic identified inland watch areas more successfully than those shown the traditional cone, but that improved understanding did not translate into greater perceived danger or more planning for protective action; it also did not improve their ability to recognize warning areas. The researchers pointed to a persistent obstacle: research has long shown that people often mistake a wider cone for a bigger storm, and Ray said that misconception can be hard to shake even with an updated graphic.

The researchers stressed their results do not question NHC forecasting’s quality, which they call highly accurate; the challenge, co-author Patrick Merle said, is communicating that science so non-meteorologists understand their risk. Merle, a professor and director of FSU’s School of Communication, said communication falls short if people find information credible but still don’t understand it well enough to act. The researchers recommend pairing the graphic with local forecasts on expected impacts, rather than relying on it alone.