Study reveals what air travelers will tolerate for non-discriminatory security screening

April 28, 2017, Society for Risk Analysis

Mounting anti-terrorism security procedures and the Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) screening processes have launched numerous debates about the protection of civil liberties and equal treatment of passengers. A new study published in Risk Analysis has successfully quantified how much potential air passengers value equal protection when measured against sacrifices in safety, cost, wait time, and convenience.

The study, "Valuing equal protection in aviation screening," examined how much American travelers valued the principle of equal protection by quantifying the "equity premium."

The equity premium included the following components: monetary costs defined as a screening fee that passengers were willing to pay per flight; wait time defined as the length of time in minutes that passengers had to wait to complete security screening; convenience defined as the proportion of passengers without contraband who are mistakenly singled out for further scrutiny; and safety defined as the acceptable percentage of passengers who board with contraband that was not detected during screening (known as the "miss rate").

The study is based on the responses of 222 participants in an online survey who were recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk. Each watched a four-minute video that described the study and explained the equity premiums. Respondents were then randomly assigned to one of three possible two-stage screening procedures that evaluated passengers according to a set of behavioral indicators (such as perceived fear or stress), their (age, race, sex and/or national origin) or at random. Respondents then completed 10 trade-off assessments to determine how much they were willing to sacrifice to avoid differential treatment.

For all selection procedures, were willing to pay up to $15 and tolerated an increase of up to two additional passengers boarding with contraband to avoid inequitable screenings. When selection procedures focused on demographic characteristics, they were willing to wait an additional 15 minutes. However, respondents who were assigned to procedures that selected passengers at random or according to their behavior were only willing to tolerate an additional five minutes.

Male and female respondents also responded differently. To avoid a less equitable screening, female participants were willing to wait longer and pay more than male respondents. Females were 2.8 times more likely to wait longer than the minimum wait time and 1.7 times more likely to pay more than the minimum screening fee. However, there were no significant differences in fee or wait time allowances between white and non-white respondents.

"We know that travelers value both safety and equity, but what we did not know is how they reconcile these conflicting priorities," said Kenneth Nguyen, corresponding author and quantitative methods graduate student at the University of Southern California. "The value of the current research is to shed light on how travelers make this trade-off and, perhaps more importantly, uncover factors that affect this trade-off, and suggest ways that stakeholders can incorporate these findings in the design of security policies."

The overall low numbers suggest that most respondents were only willing to make limited sacrifices for more equitable screening and that they still placed a high value on low costs, shorter wait times, greater safety and convenience. People were willing to give up equal protection for other priorities like minimizing cost and inconvenience and maximizing safety.

These results offer valuable insights for the TSA and other security officers. Even if procedures based on demographic characteristics were more effective than random or behavior-based selections, travelers in this study showed they are much more opposed to these discriminatory procedures by making greater sacrifices in equity premiums when experiencing this type of .

Explore further: Aviation professor expects boost in fliers for the holidays

More information: Kenneth D. Nguyen et al. Valuing Equal Protection in Aviation Security Screening, Risk Analysis (2017). DOI: 10.1111/risa.12814

Related Stories

Air travelers don't mind delays if security checks consistent

September 25, 2006

A new study finds that people are willing to endure the wait for airport security screening, especially if delays are consistent among airports and at different times of day. Findings also show that preferences vary between ...

Risk-based passenger screening could make air travel safer

January 31, 2012

Anyone who has flown on a commercial airline since 2001 is well aware of increasingly strict measures at airport security checkpoints. A study by Illinois researchers demonstrates that intensive screening of all passengers ...

Recommended for you

'iPal' robot companion for China's lonely children

June 14, 2018

It speaks two languages, gives math lessons, tells jokes and interacts with children through the tablet screen in its chest—China's latest robot is the babysitter every parent needs.

Apple closing iPhone security gap used by law enforcement

June 14, 2018

Apple is closing a security gap that allowed outsiders to pry personal information from locked iPhones without a password, a change that will thwart law enforcement agencies that have been exploiting the vulnerability to ...

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.