According tothe research, available evidence does not in any way support whetherthe behavioral indicators used in Transportation SecurityAdministration (TSA) for passenger screening using non-verbalbehavior is effective in identifying persons who may be a threat tothe aviation security[CITATION GAO10 l 2057 ].The data analyzedfor 2011 and 2012 fiscal years by GAO on the rates at which behaviordetection officers (BDOs) referred passengers for further screeningbased on nonverbal behavior revealed a huge variation across allairports. This raised questions on the effectiveness of theeffectiveness of behavioral indicators by the BODs[CITATION GAO13 l 2057 ].
Study revealthat the results obtained cannot be used conclusively due tolimitations in the design and collection of data. Nevertheless, by2012, TSA came up with a performance metrics plan that detailed theperformance measures necessary to determine the effectiveness ofbehavior detection activities. Nevertheless, the plan noted that theeffectiveness of the non-verbal passenger screening can only begauged after 3 years[ CITATION Fra12 l 2057 ].UntilTSA provides evidence that is scientifically validated indemonstrating that behavior indicators can be used in screeningpassengers, then the agency risks any funding for the activities thathave not yet been proven to be effective.
Therefore,this research will investigate whether TSA should limit futurefunding for behavior detection of passengers using non-verbalbehavior.
The purpose ofthis study is to determine if there is enough evidence oneffectiveness of non-verbal passenger screening that supports anyfunding by the TSA. However, the long term goal of this research isto provide a comprehensive analysis on the evidence on effectivenessof passenger screening using nonverbal behavior in order to determinewhether TSA should limit the funds allocated for the same. This willbe critical in eliminating the ongoing debates on whether or not tofund such activities by TSA.
Thisresearch will be based on two main research questions. These are:
How effective is the passenger screening through use of nonverbal behaviors?
Should the TSA limit funding for behavior detection?
A hypothesisis a representation of exclusive prediction of a statement andprovides a detailed concrete description of terms expected to happenin a study. Each hypothesis in the current study will be specified intwo parts. The first part describes prediction (alternativehypothesis/ H1/ HA) and the second will express any possible outcomebased on hypothesized relationship (null hypothesis/ HO / H0).
Thecurrent research is uniquely strategized on coming up with a detailedevidence of effectiveness of non-verbal passenger screening methodsby TSA and rule out on whether the funds allocated for the sameshould be limited.
Therefore,this study focusses on the following research question that helps intesting the related hypothesis.
RQ:Is the nonverbal behavioral screening process effective to warrantTSA’s funding?
H0:Passenger screening method through nonverbal behavior is veryeffective
Ha:Passenger screening method through nonverbal behavior is notineffective
H0:TSAshould provide future funding for behavior detection
Ha:TSA should limit the future funding for behavior detection
Theidentification of variables in any study is very critical. Thisresearch identifies two main variables independent and dependent.Independent variables comprises of variables that are manipulated inorder to see the effects they have to those identified to bedependent on them. On the other hand, dependent variables reflectsthat variables whose changes are as a result of amount or level ofindependent variable. Therefore, in the current research, the amountof TSA funding will be determined by the level of effectiveness ofthe nonverbal behavioral detection methods of the passengers.Therefore, TSA funding becomes the dependent variable while theeffectiveness of nonverbal passenger screening measures becomes theindependent variable.
Independent Variable: Customer screening using nonverbal behaviors
Dependent Variable: TSA funding
Bart, E. (2014). Risk-based Approaches to Airline Passenger Screening. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.
Bart, J. (2013). TSA Drops Efforts to Allow Small Knives on Planes. United States of America: USA Today.
Bartholomew, E. (2010). Airport and Aviation Security. Boca raton: CRC Press.
Frank, N., & Steve, A. (2012). Americans` View of TSA More Positive Than Negative. Princeton: Gallup.
GAO. (2010). Aviation Security: Efforts to Validate TSA`s Paasenger Screening Behavior Detection Program. Washington DC: GAO-10-763.
GAO. (2013). Aviation Security: TSA Should Limit Future Funding for Behavior Detection Activities. Washington DC: GAO-14-159.
Kenneth, C. (2011). Aviation Security: A Case for Risk-Based Passenger Screening. Monterey: Naval Postgraduate School.
Kip, H. (2012). Why Airport Security is Broken-And How to Fix It. Wallstreet Journal, 3-9.
Michael, C. (2006). There is No Perfect Security. Wallstreet Journal, 4-6.
Raphael, R. (2013). Airport Security: A National Security Challenge.Policy brief, International Border Security Forum. Washington DC: German Marshall Fund of United States.