Acceptance of Risk and Confidence Assessing Avalanche Terrain and Conditions: A Large Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic significantly disrupted the ski industry, leading to widespread resort closures in March 2020. This resulted in a substantial increase in backcountry skiing and snowboarding. In a prior survey on backcountry riders conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, 81% of experienced backcountry riders reported seeing increased numbers of people in the field, while 17% increased their own time in the backcountry. ¹ Experts throughout the western United States estimated that the pandemic led to a 50% to 100% increase in backcountry use. ² The shift from resort to backcountry skiing raised concerns among avalanche experts about inexperienced participants exposing themselves to avalanche risks beyond those found in traditional resort settings. While in-bounds resort skiing carries an inherent risk of injury or death, the overall risk to an individual skier is very low due to controlled environments and active avalanche mitigation. In these settings, fatalities are rare and typically related to incidents such as collisions or falls as opposed to avalanches. When fatalities do occur, they are generally proportional to the total number of skier days, a metric that reflects the cumulative amount of time individuals spend skiing. ³ In contrast to resort riding, where avalanche risk is actively mitigated, the backcountry presents with multiple additional hazards, including limited access to rescue services, variable snow conditions, and most critically, a significantly higher risk of avalanche. These elevated exposures contribute to the finding that backcountry activities carry the highest fatality rates among winter mountain sports. ⁴

Self-perceived risk propensity, along with the desire for reward and recognition, can drive individuals to exceed their capabilities in the backcountry. ⁵ A retrospective study of 266 backcountry riders found that backcountry riders often rely on mental shortcuts, or heuristics, when assessing avalanche risk, sometimes resulting in inadequate safety measures. Moreover, it highlighted that individuals who perceive themselves as skilled or experienced may be more likely to take risks, particularly when avalanche forecasts are ambiguous. ⁶ Cognitive biases, such as social acceptance, informal leadership, and resource value overestimation (the tendency to overvalue a specific objective, leading individuals to accept a greater risk than they otherwise would), can reinforce risky decision-making in avalanche terrain. The decision to take on risk in the backcountry is often influenced by these cognitive heuristics, leading to inadequate avalanche safety measures.^7,8

Our study investigated the relationships among experience, training, demographics, confidence, and risk propensity in backcountry decision-making. By analyzing the relationships between these, we aimed to provide insights into how these factors shape decision-making in the evolving landscape of backcountry recreation, emphasizing the importance of equipping participants with appropriate knowledge, skills, and attitudes.

Methods

We analyzed a subset of data from a study previously conducted by our senior author on backcountry skiers’ perceptions during the COVID-19 pandemic. ¹ The questionnaire covered self-reported riding ability, avalanche education, risk comfort, confidence in assessing avalanche terrain, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The study measured years of backcountry experience using the question, “How long have you been backcountry skiing?” Responses were coded as an ordinal variable: 1 (just this season), 2 (since last spring), 3 (2–3 seasons), 4 (4–6 seasons), 5 (7–9 seasons), and 6 (10 or more seasons). The study evaluated risk propensity specifically regarding riding in the backcountry on a scale of 0 (completely unwilling) to 10 (very willing) by asking, “When it comes to skiing and riding in the backcountry, how willing or unwilling are you to take risks?” The study assessed confidence in assessing avalanche terrain using the question, “How confident are you in your knowledge and ability to assess avalanche risk terrain?” Responses were coded as an ordinal variable: 0 (not confident at all), 1 (confident in simple conditions and terrain), 2 (confident in moderately complex conditions and terrain), and 3 (confident in all conditions and terrain). The study assessed the level of training using the question, “What level of avalanche training have you completed?” Responses were coded as an ordinal variable: 0 (none), 1 (informal), 2 (aware), 3 (workshop), 4 (level 1 or 2), 5 (pro). Avalanche training in the United States is standardized by the American Institute for Avalanche Research and Education (AIARE). The terms “level 1 or 2” and “pro” represent the AIARE level 1 or 2 and pro courses in avalanche education. We used Pearson correlation coefficient to measure correlation strength, while univariable and multivariable linear regression models were used to test associations between predictors and outcome variables. The significance level was set at 0.05. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 25.0, with figures generated using R version 4.0.4 and the ggplot2 package.

Results

The original study collected 5674 responses from March 1 to March 31, 2021. After excluding 882 participants who answered fewer than 3 questions on the survey, we analyzed the remaining 4792 valid responses. Backcountry and avalanche education sites provided the largest group of respondents (49%, n = 2338), followed by US avalanche centers (31%, n = 1494) and media or social media platforms (16%, n = 746). Nearly all respondents were from the United States (99.6%), with 70% identifying as male. The median age of participants was 34 years (IQR = 16).

We found a positive association between increased self-acknowledged risk propensity and greater confidence in assessing avalanche terrain, with a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.33 (p < 0.001), indicating a weak but consistent correlation (Figure 1).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Distribution of avalanche terrain assessment confidence levels (none = not confident at all; simple = confident in simple conditions and terrain; complex = confident in moderately complex conditions and terrain; all = confident in all conditions and terrain) across self-reported risk propensity scores (0 = completely unwilling to take risks; 10 = very willing). Each bar represents 100% of respondents at a given risk score.

We found a positive association between higher levels of avalanche training and increased self-confidence in assessing avalanche terrain, with a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.28 (p < 0.001), indicating a weak but consistent correlation. Confidence increased with higher levels of training, particularly at the professional level of training (Figure 2). In a multivariable linear regression model, both avalanche training level and years of backcountry skiing experience were independently associated with greater self-confidence in assessing avalanche terrain (R² = 0.28). For avalanche training level, the regression coefficient was 0.17 (95% CI: 0.15–0.19, p < 0.001), indicating that each increase in training level was associated with an average 0.17-point increase in confidence on a 0–3 scale, holding experience constant. For years of experience, the coefficient was 0.20 (95% CI: 0.19–0.21, p < 0.001), meaning that each additional level of backcountry skiing years was associated with an average 0.20-point increase in confidence, independent of training level.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 2.

Level of training versus confidence in assessing avalanche terrain.

While self-assessed ability improved with training, more than 30% of individuals lacking level 1 avalanche training still expressed confidence in appraising complex terrain (Figure 3). Two groups exhibited higher risk-taking tendencies than the overall mean: those with no formal avalanche training (risk score: 4.2) and those with advanced, professional-level training (risk score: 4.3) (Figure 3). The group without any training was small, comprising only 25 participants (<1%).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 3.

Highest level of avalanche training versus the willingness to take risks.

Our analysis of demographic characteristics revealed significant gender differences in self-confidence when evaluating avalanche terrain. On a 0 to 3 scale, males exhibited higher self-confidence compared to females, with unadjusted means of 1.8 ± 0.7 for males and 1.5 ± 0.7 for females (p < 0.001). After adjusting for age, the difference remained statistically significant (adjusted means of 1.8 for males and 1.5 for females), with 0.27 units higher than females’ (p < 0.001). We observed correlations between confidence and years of experience (Pearson correlation coefficient = 0.46, p < 0.001) as well as days per season spent backcountry skiing (Pearson correlation coefficient = 0.50, p < 0.001). Age showed a weak correlation with confidence (Pearson correlation coefficient = 0.11, p < 0.001). These findings highlight the complex nature of factors influencing confidence in avalanche terrain assessment, with gender, experience, and frequency of backcountry skiing emerging as key elements shaping individuals’ self-assuredness.

Discussion

While our large, nonrandom sample limits generalizability, it enabled us to explore associations between backcountry risk-taking propensity, training, and confidence in terrain assessment. Unlike the original analysis of this dataset, which focused on the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, our study examined relationships among variables without attempting to draw causal conclusions. We found that increasing self-identified risk-taking is weakly correlated with increased confidence in their riding abilities and in assessing avalanche terrain. A study in 2021 showed similar results, finding that risky behavior among backcountry riders was partly driven by how individuals view themselves as participants who actively sought out and embraced risk. ⁵ This aligns with another study showing that backcountry skiers often rely on cognitive heuristics, such as familiarity and commitment to prior decisions. That study found that individuals with higher risk propensity may overestimate their skill, especially in uncertain conditions, reinforcing risky decision-making. ⁶ An intriguing aspect of our study was that risk-taking levels were much higher for those with no training and those with professional training. This observation may reflect the Dunning-Kruger effect, in which beginners often lack awareness of their limitations and consequently exhibit overconfidence. ⁹ However, the small cohort of participants without training may have skewed results, particularly since 2 of the 25 reported maximum confidence levels. Only 25 respondents reported having no training, though it is possible this group does not access websites or groups dealing with winter safety. As 80% of our respondents were recruited through avalanche education classes, the sample is likely skewed toward individuals with some level of avalanche awareness or formal training.

We found that confidence in assessing avalanche terrain increased progressively with higher levels of training, particularly showing a significant leap when respondents transitioned from level 1 to professional training. This increase may be related to a combination of enhanced education and greater time spent backcountry skiing, both of which we found to be correlated positively with confidence levels. A review of risk assessment in backcountry travel showed that snowshoers were significantly more likely to underestimate avalanche danger compared to skiers when adjusted for past avalanche safety education, likely reflecting differences in terrain exposure, as snowshoers may not venture into avalanche-prone areas as frequently. ¹⁰ The observed correlation between higher levels of avalanche training and increased confidence and risk-taking may have been partially influenced by the cumulative effect of experience and time spent in the backcountry. Individuals who seek out advanced avalanche training are often those who already have significant prior experience in avalanche-prone environments. This prior experience likely contributes to their confidence by reinforcing their perception of competence in decision-making, hazard assessment, and mitigation strategies. The backcountry in winter is widely recognized as a challenging and unpredictable learning environment, where feedback about the consequences of key decisions is often unreliable. Positive outcomes frequently occur despite risky choices, while severe negative consequences, such as being caught in an avalanche, are rare but devastating. ¹¹ Additionally, greater exposure to avalanche terrain may normalize certain risks, leading to higher levels of comfort and potentially increased risk-taking behavior. A review of fatal backcountry ski injuries found that individuals involved in these accidents are typically experienced backcountry riders who choose to ride in areas with known moderate to extreme avalanche hazard. ¹² While our study primarily focused on the relationship between training and confidence and risk-taking, it is important to recognize the roles of experience and training. These trends in gained confidence through increased education and experience mirror the trend observed when compared to years of experience. This is particularly concerning because older and more experienced backcountry skiers are over-represented in avalanche fatalities, suggesting that increased confidence through experience may contribute to a dangerous increase in risk tolerance and an overestimation of one's abilities. ¹³ Recognizing these correlations enhances our understanding of the complex interplay among demographic, experiential, and educational factors that shape confidence levels in backcountry activities.

It is alarming that many novices felt comfortable assessing complex avalanche terrain, indicating a potential gap in their understanding. This suggests that avalanche education programs may wish to place greater emphasis on distinguishing between simple and complex terrain while helping students grasp the challenges involved in evaluating complex avalanche conditions.

Conclusions

We found a positive correlation between increasing levels of formal avalanche education and self-identified risk propensity, both of which were associated with heightened confidence in assessing avalanche terrain. We observed a concerning trend of unexpectedly high confidence in avalanche terrain assessment, particularly among individuals with minimal or extensive training. This highlights a need for avalanche education programs to focus on aligning riders’ confidence with their actual abilities. We hope this study informs future educational efforts aimed at improving decision-making and the safety of people using the backcountry in winter.