Abstract. Feedback via simulation tools is likely to help people improve
their decision-making against natural disasters. However, little is known on
how differing strengths of experiential feedback and feedback's availability
in simulation tools influence people's decisions against landslides. We
tested the influence of differing strengths of experiential feedback and
feedback's availability on people's decisions against landslides in Mandi,
Himachal Pradesh, India. Experiential feedback (high or low) and feedback's
availability (present or absent) were varied across four between-subject
conditions in a tool called the Interactive Landslide Simulation (ILS): high damage
with feedback present, high damage with feedback absent, low damage with feedback present,
and low damage with feedback absent. In high-damage conditions, the probabilities
of damages to life and property due to landslides were 10 times higher than
those in the low-damage conditions. In feedback-present conditions,
experiential feedback was provided in numeric, text, and graphical formats in
ILS. In feedback-absent conditions, the probabilities of damages were
described; however, there was no experiential feedback present. Investments
were greater in conditions where experiential feedback was present and
damages were high compared to conditions where experiential feedback was
absent and damages were low. Furthermore, only high-damage feedback produced
learning in ILS. Simulation tools like ILS seem appropriate for landslide
risk communication and for performing what-if analyses.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.