1 / 25

Equity as a Protected Value in Security Selection Procedures

Equity as a Protected Value in Security Selection Procedures. 14-15 February 2014 Edwards Bayesian Research Conference Richard John Kenneth Nguyen Heather Rosoff University of Southern California CREATE. Traditional Security.

marty
Download Presentation

Equity as a Protected Value in Security Selection Procedures

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Equity as a Protected Value in Security Selection Procedures 14-15 February 2014Edwards Bayesian Research ConferenceRichard JohnKenneth NguyenHeather RosoffUniversity of Southern CaliforniaCREATE

  2. Traditional Security • Traditional wisdom is that security measures ought to be omnipresent. • At an airport, for example, this would entail monitoring all entrances, inbound traffic, and persons. • Limited resources realistically preclude this possibility. • As a result, adversaries can observe security arrangements over time, and exploit any predictable vulnerabilities to their advantage.

  3. Different Targeted Security Screening Strategies • One way to countervail this exploitation is with the use of targeted security screening procedures. • More rigorous screening procedures creates more intrusions for passengers(e.g. thorough searches of persons and their belongings, screening fees). • Passengers are going to have different perceptions of flight risks, and for this reason, different preferences relative to sacrificing equity concerns to protect against these risks. • Viscusi and Zeckhauser (2003) conducted a study evaluating individual willingness to sacrifice civil liberties at airports to reduce terrorism risk.

  4. Civil Liberties and Terrorism Risk Tradeoff:Viscusi and Zeckhauser, 2003

  5. Viscusi and Zeckhauser, 2003 • Survey examined civil liberties issues pertaining to the targeting of passengers for screening at airports based on demographic characteristics • Potential policy concern: • Screening based on ethnicity and race creates concerns and costs for certain populations • Actual cost of inspection may be costless, but not to the individual being inspected • Support for profiling increases if there is a substantial reduction in avoided delays to other passenger • Survey results demonstrate that targeted screening of airline passengers raises conflicting concerns of efficiency and equity

  6. Research Questions • What values, if any, are subjects willing to tradeoff for increased security at the airport? • Do subjects show more sensitivity to the protection of civil liberties compared to other values? • Are any values “protected values”? • How do subjects’ tradeoffs vary relative to different screening selection procedures?

  7. Study Design • Five Values (Equity, Safety (miss rate), Hassle (false alarm rate), wait time and screening cost) • Ten tradeoff assessments conducted per subject • Inequity manipulation involving airport security screening selection policies (Profiling vs. Behavioral Indicators vs. Random selection) • Trade-offs based on a series of binary choices to determine indifference between alternatives between airlines (Pacific or Coastal) varying only in security procedures employed

  8. Security Attributes • Equity: screening selection policy Current one-stage screening Vs Alternative two-stage screening (profile-based, behavior-based, randomization) • Miss rate: proportion of people not detected during security and board a plane with contraband • False alarm rate: proportion of people without contraband who are falsely identified as having contraband during security screening • Time: average waiting time for security screening • Money: cost of screening fee per flight/each time a passenger undergoes screening

  9. Design Overview

  10. Example Indifference Trade-off between Equity and Cost

  11. Trade-off Summary

  12. Equity versus Cost and Wait TimeTradeoff

  13. Equity versus Miss-Rate and False-Alarm Tradeoff

  14. Descriptive Statistics

  15. Equity versus Wait Time

  16. Civil Liberty versus Cost

  17. Civil Liberty versus Miss Rate

  18. Civil Liberty versus False Alarm Rate

  19. Tradeoff Values Across Groups

  20. Tradeoff Values Within Groups (Medians)

  21. Distribution of Cost ($ US) Equivalent to Reduction in Miss Rate and False Alarm Rate from 1:9 to 1:99

  22. Distribution of Wait Time (Minutes) Equivalent to Reduction in Miss Rate and False Alarm Rate from 1:9 to 1:99

  23. Distribution of Cost ($ US) Equivalent to Reduction in Wait Time from 60 to 15 min.

  24. Median Trade-off Equivalents

  25. Equity as a Protected Value in Security Selection Procedures 14-15 February 2014Edwards Bayesian Research ConferenceRichard JohnKenneth NguyenHeather RosoffUniversity of Southern CaliforniaCREATE

More Related