Human Factors in Avi Accidents

[MakersTeleMark]

I think it really does come down to group size and how pre-go decisions have been agreed to be made. If it's one person verses 4 that doesn't feel comfortable, that person should take the skin track down. No one should ever be pressured to ski a line they aren't comfortable with especially when a safe alternative exists (provided that has been prepared ahead of time). When it's one person saying go, versus 4 saying no, then you can only do your best to voice your concerns, make your choice to back off, and unfortunately hope that person isn't so selfish or stupid to ski a line solo which could involve the rest of the group initiating a rescue.

Like I said earlier, the numbers really affect the effects of human factors, which is why I think we all agree, more than 3 folks on the ground does not help in any smart decision making in the backcountry, but actually confounds it.

[Danno]

Just to clarify, I was comfortable skiing the slope and it was my impression that others in the group were less comfortable, or did not possess enough information to make as informed of a decision as I made.

Interesting that you mention not having enough info. Do you remember 2 years ago, probably in that same spot or nearby, we dug a pit and the snow was as solid as could be, I braced my legs and was pushing on the column and couldn't get the column to move (no, this is not a new shear test, I was just fucking around). Later, other members of our party who were not there to analyze the pit found themselves on the slope, and were extremely hesitant to ski it despite our protestations that it was rock solid.

One of the difficulties in digging pits where it would not be safe to have the whole party out there at the pit. Those who don't get to see firsthand may not have the info that they need to feel comfortable.

[bones get broke]

Some great stuff here. This is one of the better, more useful threads I've seen here in quite a while.

Here's my .02: Regardless of all else I continually remind myself throughout a BC tour that I am walking amongst indiscriminate killers. As long as I have that thought floating around I can hopefully maintain a conservative approach and avoid some of the pitfalls that lead to accidents (mad pow disease).

[srsosbso]

Some great stuff here.

Yup, even without the boobs. Thanks to skibee for getting this one going.

Love the 'mad pow disease' line by the way. Can I use that?

[skibee]

I am really enjoying the armchair entertainment of reading the discussion of a particular decision made (or not made) once. I would love to read a blow by blow on the decision... did it slide, how was the skiing? How did the group feel afterwards? Will you ever ski together again?

Geez that sounds like a sound bite from a soap opera...
Tune in next week when you will hear Nanoski say "I don't like the feel of the snow!"
What will be the response of the group, will Nanoski have to buy beer, will there be an avalanche, who is having Nanoski's baby???

All I'm saying is what a great real life interaction that demonstrates how a group makes a decision and continues to analysis it many moons later.

Even if the slope didn't slide... was it stable? How can we ever tell?

[mntlion]

Even if the slope didn't slide... was it stable? How can we ever tell?

schrodinger's cat

[bones get broke]

Love the 'mad pow disease' line by the way. Can I use that?

Have at it matey, I heard it somewhere else anyway.

Then I posted it here and effectively stole it. That is a pretty complex decision unto itself. Stealing someone elses line......I knew it was wrong, I did it anyway .

[srsosbso]

schrodinger's cat

Don't be silly. Cats don't ski backcountry.

[skibee]

Yes but just because it is in the box is it dead or alive... just because we skied it was it stable.

All I can say is that if we had anouther cat we could try an experiment!!!

[srsosbso]

[Tye 1on]

schrodinger's cat

Or the Heisenberg Principle of Uncertainty.

As soon as you ski the slope you've changed it's potential behavior.

With or without a cat.

[hafilax]

You are the cat and the avalanche is the radioactive nucleus.

Does anyone have any experience with the Avaluator? It is an attempt at taking some of the wishful thinking out of the decision making process by going through a checklist. If you go to the link you will see that the CAC has given avalanche terrain complexities ratings for many common trips in Western Canada. The forecast with the terrain gives a pre trip estimate of the hazard which is then modified by field observations. The difficulty is then convincing the group that a piece of cardboard is telling you not to ski that slope.

The motivation behind it was stories like that of A Dozen More Turns where all the signs of danger were there but a knowledgeable and experienced group somehow didn't put the pieces together.

[Snow Dog]

Or the Heisenberg Principle of Uncertainty.

As soon as you ski the slope you've changed it's potential behavior.

With or without a cat.

Tossing a cat on the slope changes it too.

I was thinking: Skibee's Avalanche Uncertainty. You can never be sure of the stability of the slope.

Even skiing a slope doesn't guarantee that it's stable.

[skibee]

Mntlion, yet another reason for getting the second cat... a spare if we need to asses a slope!!!

I think I need the "get drunk and post as much as you can" thread right now!!!

As for the SAU: either be cautious and go fer coffee or just ski it SFD (straight f*cking down)

[hafilax]

I hope I'm never faced with having to go on my own to play it safe and have the remainder of the group involved in an accident.

[StraightFlush]

This is so true. These same people also seem to fail at realizing what a beacon shovel and probe are meant to do. They aren't meant to make you "core", they are meant for saving someone's life.

"Yeeeehaaaw!!! I have a beacon shovel and probe so now I can go out into the back country". No. You now have the tools to dig in the snow and locate a possibly dead best friend.

Beacon + Shovel + Probe != (does not equal) Safety

All the gear, no idea. You see these types getting into scrapes so often...

A great initial post, and a really thought provoking thread.

[pechelman]

Just to clarify, I was comfortable skiing the slope and it was my impression that others in the group were less comfortable, or did not possess enough information to make as informed of a decision as I made.

This brings out another small point as well: these types of situations usually only come up in as you describe yellow, to high yellow scenarios, which exacerbate the effects of human factors. When it's all green/go, there may be human factors involved, but they don't necessarily manifest themselves in a dangerous situation.

And just as an FYI, I stood in that very same pit almost a year ago to that day, and backed down from that very line.

i agree it was an interesting situation wrt human factor, but i think you might be reading a bit much into our seeming complacency.

Bryan, who wasnt in that pit to start, had just dug one right before and was skiing all morning so he had some familiarity with the snow. He then joined you at the end and came to the same conclusion i did, on my own, that the new snow lacked the cohesion to slide.

Dave was in there for a second to see the rain layer and I think inspect the shear quality and new snow cohesion, and of course helped with the RB.

Everyone else was in the pit.

as for myself, i was an observer of the tests. I also didnt feel it was a good idea to get a 4th or 5th person into that small pit on that slope in such a small area and instead hung out by that large tree about 10ft away. I did not disagree with anything i saw vs what i heard as far as assesment, except for a conservatively false statement that it would slide. I wasnt so sure that it would, but i have no problem with being conservative so I said nothing. Right after you dropped in, Bryan and I were talking to S about her concerns and what our individual thoughts were.

I guess one of the lessons, or maybe what im trying to hint at with my seeming complacency, id take away from all this, especially in a group that large, is that too many cooks can ruin a recipe, and that if theyre all following the recipe, its ok to say nothing, but when someone reaches for the anchovy paste in the chocolate cake recipe, its a good time to speak up. Im generally a quiet person, but im most definitely not shy and will speak up when something is wrong.

I guess this boils right into another human factor in knowing your partners and how they react and understanding those reactions.



I will say one thing I disagreed with, after the fact, due to how quickly it all happened, was that we didnt discuss a plan as to what we were all going to do, should the slope not have ripped out on Dobish's ski cut. The decision was made very quickly and somewhat independently by him to proceed farther down. I dont disagree with his decision, just the fact we didnt cover all our bases before he was sent out.

anyway
this is interesting
i also think it was helpful to type this out

[Rontele]

I will add that I have enjoyed this discussion and coming out into the cirque after skiing Boner City was eye opening (seeing that most of the other lines had ripped out). But we have had the experience of seeing how Boner City sets up--protected from the wind, deeper pack, not as many rocks for starting zones, etc.

The snowpack that day was junk, but lacked any energy to move should a trigger stressed it to a breaking point.

[TeleAl]

Hey there gang, well even I have to admit things don't look good right now and we are all in for a long slow wait until things settle down and have a chance to cure.

Perhaps a bit off topic, but in my opinion,
things in BC are not going to settle down
until after the snow melts in the summer.
There is a bad layer, and it is the bottom layer.

Perhaps it could cure itself, but at the moment, I doubt it.

It did warm up where I am for a couple days,
snow consolidated into a crusty hard frozen layer,
but it did not penetrate to the bottom layer.

As for the rest of the thread, I often take the hit for saying no.
Call me chicken if you must.

[Tri-Ungulate]

Skibee, great observations and thread.
I've heard a lot about 'heuristic traps', some of which are along the same lines as your notes. A quick search popped up this page over on pistehors.
------------snip---------------
The paper "Evidence of heuristic traps in recreational avalanche accidents" presented at the 2002 International Snow Science Workshop by Ian McCammon gives some interesting insights into the decisions making process in the backcountry. A heuristic is a rule that people apply when they recognize some common pattern in a complex set of data. Analysing avalanche risk a a complex judgement call involving variables such as new snowfall, predominant wind direction and speed, humidity, temperature history, slope gradient and steepness. A heuristic trap is where the backcountry skier ignores this large data set and incorrectly applies a rule of thumb.

McCammon investigated 622 accidents in the United States between 1972 and 2001 and identified four common traps: Familiarity, Social Proof, Commitment and Scarcity. What was surprising was that experienced backcountry users were as likely to be caught by these traps as inexperienced.
----------snip---------
Sorry to only respond with a cut/paste, but it rings true in my little brain...
The entire paper here.

McCammon has a followup study where he adds 2 more heuristic traps, the "Expert Halo" (the tendency for a party to defer to the judgment of a group leader, whether the leader is making good decisions or not) alluded to in liquidchaos' second post, and the "Social Acceptance" heuristic (the tendency to engage in activities that we think will get us noticed or accepted by people we like or respect, or by people who we want to like or respect us.)

IMO the Social Acceptance heuristic takes on increased importance in these days of posted TRs and TGR cred. And McCammon's Social Acceptance data seems to actually belie the Mixed Gender hypothesis skibee mentions in her original post - it appears that males in the presence of females tend to take greater risks, and are less likely to be reined in by their female counterparts (snoboy mentions this as well).

blah, blah, FUCKING blah about the contributing factors. Everything boils down to the decisions that you make...or fail to make.

Make good decisions.

Part of making good decisions is knowing how you come at them, and understanding the underlying heuristics that get you there. When we better recognize some of the shortcuts and/or fallacies that color our decisionmaking process, we can (hopefully) make more rational decisions.

Although I know of at least one very sage avy expert who less inclined to believe in "heuristic traps", I tend to be an adherent of McCammon's concepts, though aspects of his research can remain arguable. I think that for those who have avalanche awareness training, the important next step is to understand how we can best use our training and not let it be overridden by such heuristic traps.

[Scottish_Skier]

For sure - Human factors play a huge role.

The best advice I ever got given is that safe mountain travel comes down to 3 factors....

1. Snow
2. Terrain
3. & (perhaps most importantly!) People.

The people factor includes a whole load of subtle stuff.
Group dynamics, communication, sensible decision making, attitude to risk and also being properly equiped... amongst others.

Ideally you (obviously) want to get all 3 factors correct.
However in most accidents usually 2 or more out of the 3 factors are wrong ?

[mntlion]

bump for the new year...