TSA Should Limit Future Funding For Behavior Detection Activities

TSAShould Limit Future Funding For Behavior Detection Activities

TSAShould Limit Future Funding For Behavior Detection Activities

Overthe years, the TSA has been receiving fund and invest on behavioralindicators used in Transport Security Administration (TSA) mainly forpassengers screening so as to determine the people that are a threatto aviation security. From the study and the results obtained fromthe use of these non-behavioral indicators were not true because itwas realized that there were disparities in the result in cases ofpassengers who referred for further screening (Frank and Steve(2012). It, therefore, begs the question whether the behavioralindicators are effective on what they are meant to determine.

Aresult that was conducted by TSA shows that the results obtained fromthe behavioral indicators were no something to be fully dependent ondue to the collection of data limitation. TSA in this regard came upwith a plan on how best the behavioral indicators could be of use inthe effective determination of individual behavior. Therecommendation was that for the effectiveness of the behavior ofindividual to be realized, screening effectiveness can only be gaugedafter three years. From this research, it is clear that thenon-verbal behavioral indicators are not of importance and should bediscarded.

Thisresearch is, therefore, to determine the effectiveness of non-verbalpassenger screening and if it is worth being funded by TSA. Theresearch is to be used to provide evidence on the effectiveness ofthe passenger screening using the non-behavioral indicators. Theresearch is mainly to help find out if the indicators should continuebeing funded by TSA out of the evidence that would be obtained fromthe research. This is to once and for all clear the air about theeffectiveness of screening passengers that is worth funding.

Theresearch employs the variables that are critical to conducting theresearch on the screening as per the non-behavioral. The researchemploys two variables, that is, independent and dependent. Theindependent variables are the variables that are manipulated to seetheir effects on the dependent variable. Dependent variables arethose variables that which change as a result of amount independentvariable. For example in this research, TSA funding is an independentvariable but will depend on how effective the non-verbal passengerscreening.

Theresearch looks into the past researches on the matter, and theresults obtained. The research also looks at the reports from thebehavior detection officers (BDOs) and their recommendations. Theresearch analyzes and looks into the previous data analyzed by theGAO. The data of interest being data analyzed for 2011 and 2012 onthe rates of how often the BDOs referred the passengers for furtherscreening. The research also looked at the concerns raised and askedby the GAO report (Gao 2013).

Theresearch ends by giving recommendation and way forward on the issueof screening of passengers about behavioral indicators. Based on theresearch the report indicates and would be able to answer thequestions, how effective are the passenger screening by use ofnon-verbal behaviors, and if TSA should limit funding for thebehavior detection. From the results and conclusion made a suggestionis given on the way forward.

Survey

Asurvey that supports this statement is the GAO survey of the totalnumber of referrals for the fiscal year 2011 and 2012. GAO on itssurvey realized that a big number of passengers that were referredfor screening, taken for further questioning and inspection by BDO,were not arrested. From the survey, only 0.4% passengers out of 100%that went through screening by observation techniques (SPOT) werearrested. On the other hand, referrals that resulted in lawenforcement officer (LEO) referrals were 4% arrested. The survey wastaken in 49 airports.

Thesurvey shows the irrelevancy for the non-behavioral detection. GAO intheir report of the survey suggests the scrapping off of thedetections and that it doesn`t need financial support from the TSA.(http://www.gao.gov/assets/660/658923.pdf)

References

Cammozzo,A. Airports as an encoding/decoding device: A semiotic analysis of adesigned space.

Duncan,W. K., &amp Helpin, M. L. (1987). Bilateral fusion and germination:A literature analysis and case report. OralSurgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology,64(1),82-87.

Frank,M. G., Maccario, C. J., &amp Govindaraju, V. (2009). Behavior andsecurity. ProtectingAirline Passengers in the Age of Terrorism. Greenwood Pub Group,Santa Barbara, California,86-106.

Frank,N., &amp Steve, A. (2012). Americans`View of TSA More Positive Than Negative. Princeton:Gallup

Fogelholm,M., &amp van Marken, L. W. (1997). Comparison of body compositionmethods: a literature analysis. EuropeanJournal of Clinical Nutrition,51(8),495-503.

Frederickson,H. G., &amp LaPorte, T. R. (2002). Airport security, highreliability, and the problem of rationality. PublicAdministration Review,33-43.

Gao.(2010). Aviation Security: Efforts to Validate TSA`s PaasengerScreening Behavior Detection Program. Washington DC: GAO-10-763.

Gao.(2013). AviationSecurity: TSA Should Limit Future Funding for Behavior DetectionActivities. WashingtonDC: GAO-14-159.

Gonzalez,R., Gasco, J., &amp Llopis, J. (2006). Information systemsoutsourcing: A literature analysis. Information&amp Management,43(7),821-834.

Kittinger,R., &amp Bender, J. (2015). Methods for Determining the Role ofFatigue and Cognitive Load on Behavior Detection Officers (BDOs)Performance in the Field. In Foundationsof Augmented Cognition(pp. 36-43). Springer International Publishing.

Kasturiratne,A., Wickremasinghe, A. R., de Silva, N., Gunawardena, N. K.,Pathmeswaran, A., Premaratna, R., &amp de Silva, H. J. (2008). Theglobal burden of snakebite: A literature analysis and modelling basedon regional estimates of envenoming and deaths. PLoSMed,5(11),e218.

Kittinger,R., &amp Bender, J. (2015). Methods for Determining the Role ofFatigue and Cognitive Load on Behavior Detection Officers (BDOs)Performance in the Field. In Foundationsof Augmented Cognition(pp. 36-43). Springer International Publishing.

Koller,C. I., Wetter, O. E., &amp Hofer, F. (2015). What Is Suspicious WhenTrying to be Inconspicuous? Criminal Intentions Inferred FromNonverbal Behavioral Cues. Perception,44(6),679-708.

Miller,R. H., &amp Luft, H. S. (1994). Managed care plan performance since1980: a literature analysis. Jama,271(19),1512-1519

Oster,C. V., Strong, J. S., &amp Zorn, C. K. (2013). Analyzing aviationsafety: Problems, challenges, opportunities. Researchin transportation economics,43(1),148-164.

Prausnitz,M. R., &amp Noonan, J. S. (1998). Permeability of cornea, sclera,and conjunctiva: a

literatureanalysis for drug delivery to the eye. Journalof pharmaceutical sciences,87(12),1479-1488.

Perry,W. L., Davis, P. K., &amp Brown, R. A. Behavioral and SocialIndicators of Potential Violent Acts: Implications from a Review ofthe Science Base.

Rodriguez,B. M. (2007). PerceptionTowards Airport Security as it Relates to Terrorism: An Analysis ofCriminology/criminal Justice Majors and Non-majors.ProQuest.

WiggintonJr, M., Jensen, C. J., Graves, M., &amp Vinson, J. (2014). What Isthe Role of Behavioral Analysis in a Multilayered Approach toAviation Security?. Journalof Applied Security Research,9(4),393-417.