Attitude, decision-making, and behavior among a small group of citizens near the path of the Siren, Wisconsin tornado of 18 June 2001

National Weather Digest, Dec, 2003 by William Monfredo, John P. Tiefenbacher

More than 75% of those warned generally or strongly agreed that their warnings had given them enough time to seek safe shelter. The most common complaint was that the tornado struck quickly. Also, because a lightning strike during the previous month rendered the village's emergency siren inoperable, and there was an interruption of the village electricity 20 minutes prior to the tornado, some residents in Siren, Wisconsin were unfortunately never aware of the National Weather Service's tornado warning. Approximately 66% of those warned were fairly pleased with the applicability of their warnings to their own personal circumstances, generally or strongly agreeing that the tornado warning was adequate for them and their specific location. However, when participants were queried if they believed that the "overall" tornado warning for the whole village was adequate, 50% of the study group voiced their dissatisfaction.

About 80% of those interviewed stated that they had a preset plan of action in the event of a tornado. The most popular preset plan of action was going to their basements (75%), while other plans included moving to a closet, the lowest room, a bathroom, or a crawl space. A little more than 50% of those with preset plans of action actually followed their plans. Some of those that did not were either not at home, sheltered in an alternative location, watched the storm from their porch, or were simply unaware a storm was bearing down upon the village.

A majority felt safe in their actions to evade or reduce the impact of this particular tornado. However, 33% of the study group moved to an interior room, bathroom, or a closet for safety during the experience. At least 50% of the study group sought out or gathered family members before moving to their safe place. No individual moved to a motorized vehicle for safety, nor did they leave a car, truck, or motor home. No one moved to a low-lying depression or ditch. About 50% of the study group attempted to visually verify the tornado threat before taking personal, protective action. Of those that watched for the tornado, more than 50% of them observed the sky for between 1 and 5 minutes. Eight people claimed to have seen the tornado, with most of those limiting their actual viewing of the tornado to less than five minutes. Nobody that the research team interviewed, however, videotaped or photographed the tornado. Most people left their windows alone before seeking shelter from the tornado. Only one person intentionally opened them.

A 50% share of the study group believed that their chance of experiencing another tornado at their given location was less than 10 percent. With respect to future response and mitigation, more than 50% of the study population said they would respond differently in the event of a future tornado. The most frequently cited actions that people would undertake to prepare for another tornado threat included the acquisition of a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) weather radio and reliance on television for timely weather information and warnings. Few people were planning on making modifications to their homes.