Multi-hazard improves app retention
Comparison of alerting and attrition for the multi-hazards SD Emergency and the single-hazard QuakeAlert
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 22029377 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Michael R Brudzinski (0000-0003-1869-0700, Miami University, corresponding author), Danielle F Sumy (0000-0002-8063-6265, U.S. National Science Foundation), Patty Jordan, PW Jordan (Health and Human Services Agency), Stephen Rea (0000-0002-2732-6014, Health and Human Services Agency), Kaily Gomez (0009-0005-1787-1237, Miami University), Michael Robles (Health and Human Services Agency), Yuliana Briceno (Health and Human Services Agency), Shelley Olds (0000-0002-1458-1489, Earth Island Institute) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 130 |
| Pages | 105832 |
| Publication date | 2025-11-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2212-4209 |
| Publisher | Elsevier BV (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2025.105832 |
| OpenAlex | W4414569996 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 28 |
One of the targets of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction is to ‘substantially increase the availability of and access to multi-hazard early warning systems and disaster risk information and assessments to people by 2030’. A key problem in implementation of warning systems is retention: ensuring users retain the technological pathways for receiving warnings. We investigated trends in the installation and uninstallation of the SD Emergency multi-hazard alerting app and whether they were related to alerting patterns in the County of San Diego, California, USA. Evaluation of alerts from 2017-2023 revealed a wide range of alert types with fire being the most common, accounting for more than half of alerts. We found a temporal correlation between alerting with SD Emergency installation rates, with clear peaks in installation rates that matched the timing of alerts. Individuals were ∼4 times more likely than the median (33 installs/day) to install the app during an alerting period than outside of one. Uninstallation rates had only a modest increase with the number of alerts and were far outpaced by the increase in installation rates as the number of alerts increased. This finding indicates that overalerting may not be an issue as previously thought. Most importantly, the SD Emergency app maintained a retention rate of ∼55%, which was ∼15% higher than the single-hazard alerting app QuakeAlert . Higher retention rates for multi-hazard alerting apps improve the likelihood that people will retain other hazard alerting capabilities, especially for low frequency, high impact events like earthquakes or tsunami
Attrition · Emergency department · Hazard · Injury prevention · Occupational safety and health · Poison control · Warning system · Disaster Management and Resilience · Evacuation and Crowd Dynamics · Knowledge Management and Technology
Understanding Information Systems Continuance
Knowledge, perceptions, and behavioral responses to earthquake early warning in Aotearoa New Zealand
Usability factors influencing the continuance intention of disaster apps
Earthquake early warning message testing
Actionable and understandable? Evidence-based recommendations for the design of (multi-)hazard warning messages
What defines the success of maps and additional information on a multi-hazard platform
The public's perception of an earthquake early warning system
Why should I use a multi-hazard app? Assessing the public's information needs and app feature preferences in a participatory process
Ember Alerts
Political Economy of Large Natural Disasters
| Highly cited | No |
|---|