Abstract
Focus groups with 54 participants, mostly native Spanish speakers and members of economically disadvantaged communities in Miami-Dade County, were conducted to evaluate the National Hurricane Center's Track Forecast Cone. Responses were examined using Kosslyn's analytic scheme as a diagnostic framework for identifying design issues at the syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic levels. Findings confirm previously documented misinterpretations, such as users perceiving the cone as a storm boundary or as indicating storm growth over time. The analysis also revealed misinterpretations of specific design elements that prior comprehension work has not isolated, including the dotted Days 4-5 region of the cone, the colors used for watches and warnings, and the legend abbreviations. Participants also recommended shorter, more uniform timing intervals as landfall approaches. Some findings reflect characteristics of the populations engaged, including legend-interpretation difficulties tied to language and measurement conventions. The participants found the visual elements overcrowded and sought locally relevant impact information and preparation guidance. The interpretation issues were associated with syntactic problems in information organization, semantic deficiencies in conveying the graphic's intended meaning, and pragmatic shortcomings in supporting decision-making needs. The findings inform design directions, both within the Track Forecast Cone and through complementary products, for more effective hurricane risk communication.