Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Perceptions and Affective Responses to Alternative Risk-Based Airport Security

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in Human Aspects of Transportation (AHFE 2017)

Part of the book series: Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing ((AISC,volume 597))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The current research examines how American air travelers perceive various risk-based airport security screening policies that vary in terms of selection procedure and agency. Respondents were randomly assigned to one of six experimental conditions that differ in terms of procedures for selecting passengers for enhanced screening. Respondents were presented with a conventional security option and a risk-based option, and were asked to rate these policies in terms equity, safety, and convenience. They also indicated anticipated feelings if selected for an enhanced screening in the risk-based procedure. Results suggest that the conventional approach was perceived as safer and more equitable but less convenient. Importantly, while different passenger selection procedures for enhanced screening led to distinct perceptions and feelings, respondents were indifferent between an equivalent selection procedures conducted by humans versus by computer.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 349.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 449.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Seventy-three responses were removed because respondents failed an attention check question or did not indicate their Mechanical Turk IDs—an indication that the respondents did not take the survey seriously because without the IDs, we could not assign their credits or assign penalties for careless responses.

References

  1. Bureau of Transportation Statistics https://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/press_releases/bts018_16

  2. Morral, A.R., Price, C.C., Ortiz, D.S., Wilson, B., LaTourrette, T., Mobley, B.W., Willis, H.H.: Modeling terrorism risk to the air transportation system: An independent assessment of TSA’s risk management analysis tool and associated methods. Technical report, RAND Corporation (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Scurich, N., John, R.S.: Perceptions of randomized security schedules. Risk Anal. 34(4), 765–770 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Gigerenzer, G.: Dread risk, September 11, and fatal traffic accidents. Psychol. Sci. 15(4), 286–287 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Gigerenzer, G.: Out of the frying pan into the fire: behavioral reactions to terrorist attacks. Risk Anal. 26(2), 347–35 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. U.S. Government Accountability Office. Aviation security: TSA should limit future funding for behavior detection activities: Report to congressional requesters. Technical report, United States Government Accountability Office (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Nguyen, D.K., Rosoff, H., John, R.S.: Valuing Equal Protection in Aviation Security Screening. Risk Anal. (2017). doi:10.1111/risa.12814

    Google Scholar 

  8. Lopes, L.: Doing the impossible: a note on induction and the experience of randomness. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 8(6), 626–636 (1982)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lopes, L.L., Oden, G.C.: Distinguishing between random and nonrandom events. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 13(3), 392–400 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. National Public Radio. http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/02/09/514384549/ appeals-court-rejects-bid-to-reinstate-trumps-travel-ban

  11. Jain, M., Tsai, J., Pita, J., Kiekintveld, C., Rathi, S., Tambe, M., Ordóñez, F.: Software assistants for randomized patrol planning for the LAX airport police and the federal air marshal service. Interfaces 40(4), 267–290 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Falk, A., Fehr, E., Fischbacher, U.: Testing theories of fairness—Intentions matter. Games Econ. Behav. 62(1), 287–303 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Nelson, W.R.: Equity or intention: It is the thought that counts. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 48(4), 423–430 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Greene, F., Kudrick, B., Muse, K.: Human factors engineering at the Transportation Security Administration. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, Chicago (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Madhavan, P., Wiegmann, D.A.: Effects of information source, pedigree, and reliability on operator interaction with decision support systems. Hum. Factors 49(5), 773–785 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Thompson, E.R.: Development and validation of an internationally reliable short-form of the positive and negative affect schedule PANASJ. Cross Cult. Psychol. 38(2), 227–242 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Kenneth D. Nguyen & Richard S. John

Authors
  1. Kenneth D. Nguyen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Richard S. John
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kenneth D. Nguyen .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Human Factors Engineering, Transportation Research Group, Boldrewood Innovation Campus, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom

    Neville A Stanton

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Nguyen, K.D., John, R.S. (2018). Perceptions and Affective Responses to Alternative Risk-Based Airport Security. In: Stanton, N. (eds) Advances in Human Aspects of Transportation. AHFE 2017. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 597. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60441-1_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60441-1_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-60440-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-60441-1

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation