Aviation Security and the TSA's Behavior Detection: Why Effective Academic and Practitioner Dialogue Is Vital.

Vincent Denault,Louise M Jupe

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00240

Abstract

Aviation Security and the TSA's Behavior Detection: Why Effective Academic and Practitioner Dialogue Is Vital.

Highlights

Specialty section: This article was submitted to Disaster Communications, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology
On July 20, 2017, under the pen of Kingsbury and Grover, the U.S Government Accountability Office published a report on the evidence the Transportation Security Administration provided to support behavioral indicators used “for identifying passengers who may pose a threat to aviation security” (p. 1)
The report’s conclusions were unequivocal: In our review of all 178 sources TSA cited in support of its revised list of behavioral indicators, we found that 98% (175 of 178) of the sources do not provide valid evidence applicable to the specific indicators TSA identified them as supporting (Kingsbury and Grover, 2017, p. 5)

Summary

Introduction

Specialty section: This article was submitted to Disaster Communications, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology. Whilst this report is just one example of how an organization developed and implemented practices that lack scientific evidence, such a report may suggest an insufficient dialogue, initiated by research scientists, with practitioners to adequately promote scientific knowledge. If research scientists and practitioners genuinely want to engage in dialogue “to develop solutions to problems in the world of practice, and thereby generate insights for the world of theory”

Objectives

Results

Conclusion