LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Owens, M.J. (2016)
Publisher: Wiley
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects:
Identifiers:doi:10.1002/wea.2725
‘Thunder days’ are simple records of thunderstorm activity, logging whether a human observer heard thunder on a particular day or not. Despite their low dynamic range and inherent subjectivity, thunder days are invaluable as the only long-term observations of thunderstorm occurrence, with some records stretching back into the nineteenth century. Thunder days, however, are potentially susceptible to false positives, particularly from explosions. Thus one might expect UK thunder days to show anomalously high counts on New Year's Eve and the days around 5 November, Bonfire Night, both of which are celebrated with large firework displays across the country. It is demonstrated that UK Met Office records of thunder days between 1980 and 2010 do not show any significant increase in thunder reporting around 5 November or 31 December. In fact, the days around 5 November exhibit the largest reduction in the amount of reported thunder relative to annual climatology. While meteorological variability cannot be completely ruled out, this result is suggestive of observer bias; it is speculated that human observers, armed with a priori knowledge of the likelihood of false positives, ‘second guess’ themselves to a greater degree around 5 November than the rest of the year. In fact, the data suggest they should trust in their ability to correctly discriminate between thunder and fireworks.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Brooks CEP. 1925. The Distribution of Thunderstorms Over the Globe. Her Majesty's Stationery Office: London.
    • Changnon SA. 1985. Secular variations in thunder-day frequencies in the twentieth century. J. Geophys. Res. 90(D4): 6181-6194.
    • Kitagawa N. 1989. Long-term variations in thunder-day frequencies in Japan.
    • J. Geophys. Res. 94(D11): 13183-13189.
    • Lewis RPW. 1991. Meteorological Glossary, 6th Edition. Her Majesty's Stationery Office: London.
    • 2014. Modulation of UK lightning by heliospheric magnetic field polarity. Environ.
    • Res. Lett. 9(11): 115009.
    • Perry M, Hollis D. 2005. The generation of monthly gridded datasets for a range of climatic variables over the UK. Int.
    • J. Climatol. 25(8): 1041-1054.
    • Pliske RM, Crandall B, Klein G. 2004.
    • Competence in weather forecasting, in Psychological Investigations of Competence in Decision Making. Shanteau J, Johnson P (eds). Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, pp 40-70.
    • Rampino MR. 1989. Distant effects of the Tambora Eruption of April 1815: an eyewitness account. Eos Trans. Am. Geophys.
    • Union 70(51): 1559-1559.
    • 2014. Projected increase in lightning strikes in the United States due to global warming. Science 346(6211): 851-854.
    • Stringfellow MF. 1974. Lightning incidence in Britain and the solar cycle.
    • Nature 249: 332-333.
    • Correspondence to: Mathew Owens © 2016 The Authors. Weather published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the Royal Meteorological Society.
    • doi:10.1002/wea.2725
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Funded by projects

Cite this article