Worsening weather is driving smarter behavioral interventions

Psychologists develop tools and strategies to help people understand the risk of extreme weather and take action.

Key points

• Psychologists are studying how people perceive and respond to risk to help design warning messages that are clear, credible, and emotionally resonant.
• By studying social networks and collective behavior, psychologists can help design preparedness systems that move beyond individual responsibility.
• As climate impacts intensify, psychologists will be key to developing interventions for anxiety and trauma linked to extreme weather.

As extreme weather events become more common, the question of how warnings are delivered-and whether people heed them-gains new urgency in 2026. For psychological scientists, the task ahead is to understand what makes risk communication effective and how to motivate communities to take protective action.

The gravity of this challenge hit home for Gale Sinatra, PhD, last year. On the evening of Jan. 7, wildfires swept across the hills above Eaton Canyon, just north of her house in Altadena, California. The blaze glowed in the distance for hours before Sinatra and her husband realized the danger, packed quickly-expecting to be gone only a night-and drove away. Official evacuation orders wouldn't arrive for another 30 minutes. On the west side of Altadena, many residents never received a warning at all.

By midnight, flames had devoured 1,000 acres, leaving 19 people dead and more than 9,000 buildings destroyed. For Sinatra, an education and psychology professor at the University of Southern California who studies how to communicate climate science, it was a searing lesson in what happens when disaster warnings come too late or fail to resonate. 

"The systems we have were built for the climate of the past, not the climate we're living in now," Sinatra said.

Scientists say the Eaton Fire is part of a larger pattern: Extreme weather disasters are growing more frequent and destructive, fueled by a human-altered climate, poor land management, and unchecked development. In 2025, the United States endured back-to-back billion-dollar storms on the East Coast and issued a record number of flash flood warnings as waters swept through the Southwest; intense monsoon rains killed hundreds and displaced millions in South Asia, while an early summer European heat wave was linked to more than 2,000 deaths.

Weather forecasting and emergency response are vital in mitigating the toll of extreme weather events, but so is communication. Clear, trusted messages help people understand the risks they face and feel empowered to act, whether in the moment of crisis or while preparing their communities for the next one. And human behavior lies at the heart of disaster preparedness, making psychologists essential partners in protecting communities from climate extremes.

Related content: 5 ways to improve risk communication


🔊 When crisis strikes, every word matters. 
 

Cutting through the noise

Constant digital connectivity-through cell phones that can deliver alerts in seconds but also overwhelm users with notifications or misinformation-complicates how people assess weather-related risks. The challenge for the year ahead is cutting through that noise so people know when and how to act.

Psychological scientists are helping bridge this gap between information and action. Recent research suggests that extreme weather alerts may be more persuasive when they include details about both the likelihood of an event and its potential severity (Qin, C., et al., Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, Vol. 30, No. 1, 2024; Taylor, A., et al., Risk Analysis, Vol. 44, No. 5, 2024). This approach departs from the long-standing practice of issuing warnings only after meteorological thresholds have been crossed and often without explanation of probabilities or impact. Psychologists are now examining the effects of this richer framing on how people perceive risk, trust a warning message, and decide to act. 

"Forecasts will always involve uncertainty, but building trust depends on how we communicate that uncertainty," said Rui Gaspar, PhD, a social psychologist at Lusófona University in Lisbon, Portugal, who researches environmental risk perception and communication. "By presenting both likelihood and severity, alerts help people see the full picture." (Gaspar studies how this approach affects public responses to extreme weather alerts in Portugal.)

For Gaspar and other researchers, the goal is to build resilience long before disaster strikes. Increasingly, that means combining traditional channels, such as government-issued cell phone alerts, with new platforms to raise awareness and encourage preparedness. Social media, for example, can amplify official warnings and improve their local relevance (Silver, A., & Andrey, J., Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, Vol. 27, No. 4, 2019). During hurricanes and wildfires, Twitter feeds and Facebook groups may provide on-the-ground updates about road closures and shelter locations that make government alerts more actionable (Azhar, M., et al., Sustainable Cities and Society, Vol. 130, 2025; Pourebrahim, N., et al., International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, Vol. 37, 2019).

Meanwhile, start-ups and community groups are experimenting with mesh networks-peer-to-peer systems that transmit alerts between devices without relying on cell towers-so warnings can spread even when power grids fail (Hardy, J., et al., Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Communities & Technologies, 2025; Calma, J., "Node by Node," The Verge, May 22, 2023). These innovations raise new questions for psychologists: How do people interpret alerts from unfamiliar systems? What makes them credible? How can trust be built before the next disaster hits?

Tailored messaging

A farmer in a floodplain, a young driver in Houston, and an elderly resident in a London flat may all receive the same alert but respond in distinct ways. That's why psychological research has moved from a one-size-fits-all model toward designing warnings that reflect users' different capacities, contexts, and values (Taylor, A. L., et al., International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, Vol. 30, Part A, 2018).

Anthony Leiserowitz, PhD, director of the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, describes a spectrum of responses to extreme weather warnings. At one end are "first outs," those who leave as soon as an alert arrives; at the other end are "diehards," those who stay put even under mandatory evacuation orders. First outs may need only brief confirmation and guidance, while diehards require more detailed, persuasive communication that underscores the severity of the threat and risks of staying behind (Climate Change in the American Mind: Beliefs & Attitudes, Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, 2025).

Gaspar notes that these differences stem from not only risk tolerance but also the values people prioritize when danger strikes. During weather disasters, many residents risk precious minutes to check on loved ones, such as a friend living alone or an elderly parent in a nursing home. Far from irrational, these choices reveal one entry point for tailoring warnings. Reassuring residents that emergency services will assist nursing homes, for example, can reduce hesitation during evacuations.

Researchers are testing which messages resonate with specific groups. In Texas, ongoing flood safety studies found that the long-used slogan "Turn Around, Don't Drown" didn't resonate with some audiences-especially young men, who are more likely to exhibit risky behaviors during extreme weather, like driving through floodwaters (Stephens, K. K., & Bean, H., "Why It Can Be Hard to Warn People About Dangers Like Floods," The Conversation, July 11, 2025). Less concerned about their own vulnerability, these participants responded more strongly to a reframed message: "Keep Your Car High and Dry."

Expanding this psychological research to encompass more perspectives is essential for protecting vulnerable individuals, such as residents of flood-prone neighborhoods with limited resources or rural communities with few evacuation routes. "Standardized warnings may skim over their realities," said Sinatra, adding that this can leave communities less prepared and more exposed. Without careful attention, communication can deepen existing inequalities instead of closing them.

Community contexts and collective responsibility

Historically, disaster preparedness has been framed as an individual responsibility. Public guidelines often take the form of checklists and supply inventories, placing the burden on households to prepare alone. But building durable response systems requires recognizing that "information about extreme weather doesn't move in a vacuum," said Leiserowitz. It circulates through families, neighborhoods, and institutions, gaining-or losing-credibility along the way (Bostrom, A., et al., International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, Vol. 30, Part A, 2018).

For psychologists in 2026, this means understanding how community ties influence readiness and response. As Gaspar explains, even the clearest warnings don't guarantee action. 

"You might be motivated to act and have the resources and knowledge you need. But if your neighbors, family, and friends aren't acting, or if they express distrust in the authority issuing the warning, that will influence your own decision," said Gaspar.

That social dynamic underscores why motivating whole communities, not just individuals, is crucial. In New Zealand, disaster readiness improved when residents were encouraged to form connections through "know your neighbor" campaigns and when local governments invested in shared spaces like community halls and gardens, and digital hubs like neighborhood Facebook groups. Strengthened ties created networks that outlasted individual leaders and spread responsibility (Das, M., et al., Disasters, Vol. 49, No. 4, 2025). In the United States, researchers are exploring similar ideas through neighborhood wildfire drills, blending practice with behavioral research to understand how collective participation can be sustained over time (Stephens, K. K., et al., Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, Vol. 31, No. 1, 2023).

In the United States, this work has taken on added urgency as federal agencies such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Weather Service (NWS) face sweeping budget cuts (Natanson, H., & Dennis, B., "National Weather Service at 'Breaking Point' as Storm Approaches," The Washington Post, Sept. 27, 2025). These reductions have created gaps in forecasting and public communication, raising questions about who will fill them. As the White House debates further cuts in 2026, psychologists warn that these decisions could undermine both forecasting capacity and public confidence in the institutions meant to protect communities (2026 Passback Agency Funding Highlights, Office of Management and Budget, 2025).

"It's an opportunity for us, as both a research and practice community, to think about how we can adapt," said Gabrielle Wong-Parodi, PhD, an associate professor of Earth system science at Stanford University who applies behavioral decision theories to global environmental change. "The future may continue to be turbulent, so how do we create durable systems to support people?"

With federally funded capacity diminishing, communities are scrambling to find solutions (Younes, H., et al., Travel Behaviour and Society, Vol. 25, 2021). In some cases, the most trusted warnings are neighbors knocking on doors or shouting across streets. One systematic review of citizen responses to flash flood warnings found that word-of-mouth carried more immediacy, and often more authority, than emergency text alerts. More broadly, speech-based warnings delivered face-to-face or via radio, TV, and telephone proved more effective than sirens, text alerts, or websites. These channels combined low cost with high reach and credibility (Kuller, M., et al., Journal of Hydrology, Vol. 602, 2021).

International models illustrate what resilient, community-centered warning systems can look like. In Bangladesh, one of the world's most disaster-prone countries, text messages and radio announcements are paired with thousands of cyclone shelters located in schools and community centers. Volunteers patrol neighborhoods with megaphones and go door-to-door, urging residents to evacuate. The system has dramatically reduced cyclone fatalities (Islam, M. M., et al., Natural Hazards Research, Vol. 5, No. 3, 2025).

For psychologists, the task now is to adapt and refine these approaches, harnessing the strength of local ties without overburdening the same community leaders (Gladfelter, S., International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, Vol. 30, Part A, 2018). Done well, these efforts could shift disaster preparedness from a private checklist to collective action, saving lives before the first storm surge or wildfire spark.

Looking ahead, Leiserowitz says psychologists are uniquely positioned to help people manage the emotional toll of surviving extreme weather events-and to connect those experiences to the larger forces of climate change to inspire action that extends beyond the immediate emergency. 

"When people understand that their own experiences are part of something bigger, they become more likely to support efforts to reduce carbon pollution," he said.

That connection will sharpen as climatologists refine attribution science-research that quantifies how climate change increases the likelihood or intensity of specific extreme weather events-and makes its findings more accessible, Leiserowitz said. Like attribution theory, attribution science explores the causes behind events and behaviors. However, where attribution theory focuses on how people perceive and explain those causes psychologically, attribution science-used by atmospheric scientists-applies empirical methods and data to quantify and validate them. Psychologists will play key roles in helping people interpret, cope with, and act on that information.

Future research must also continue to move beyond individual behavior change to address the social and institutional systems that determine how people prepare for and respond to climate events. Scientists can draw from social and organizational psychology to understand what drives cooperation among policymakers, business leaders, and communities, and they can apply principles from behavioral science to test message framing and incentives that encourage collective action. International initiatives such as Project Drawdown have already mapped what they have found to be effective climate solutions; applied psychologists can help realize them, identifying the narratives, messengers, and social norms that mobilize institutions. Clinical and community psychologists, meanwhile, may develop interventions for climate-related anxiety, ensuring that mental health responses are as systemic as the challenges themselves.