An Exploratory Risk Perception Study of Attitudes Toward Homeland Security Systems

Abstract

Understanding the issues surrounding public acceptance of homeland security systems is important for balancing security needs and potential civil liberties infringements. A psychometric survey was used in an exploratory study of attitudes regarding homeland security systems. Psychometric rating data were obtained from 182 respondents on psychological attributes associated with 12 distinct types of homeland security systems. An inverse relationship was observed for the overall rating attributes of acceptability and risk of civil liberties infringement. Principal components analysis (PCA) yielded a two-factor solution with the rating scale loading pattern suggesting factors of perceived effectiveness and perceived intrusiveness. These factors also showed an inverse relationship. The 12 different homeland security systems showed significantly different scores on the rating scales and PCA factors. Of the 12 systems studied, airport screening, canine detectors, and radiation monitoring at borders were found to be the most acceptable, while email monitoring, data mining, and global positioning satellite (GPS) tracking were found to be least acceptable. Students rated several systems as more effective than professionals, but the overall pattern of results for both types of subjects was similar. The data suggest that risk perception research and the psychometric paradigm are useful approaches for quantifying attitudes regarding homeland security systems and policies and can be used to anticipate potentially significant public acceptance issues.

SMS Derived vs. Public Perceived Risk in Aviation Technology Acceptance (Literature Review)

“…However, there is disagreement regarding the effectiveness of media communication as an effective influencing factor. Clothier et al (2015), Moussaïd, M. (2013) and Sanquist et al (2008) concluded that the media could be a significant influencing factor. Sjöberg (2000) differed concluding it was not as significant as other influencing factors.…”

“…For example, nuclear war images negatively affected perceived risk regarding nuclear power (Slovic et al, 1991). Clothier et al (2015) and Sanquist et al (2008) found that media communication can be very influential in forming perceived risk opinions, especially when there is little subject knowledge. Moussaïd (2013) supports this premise stating that individuals often seek media information to fill knowledge gaps with the amount dictated by existing knowledge.…”

“…Individualists consider factors affecting individual freedom the most dangerous. Sanquist, Mahy & Morris (2008) echoes the individual freedom aspect. Egalitarians view factors affecting technology and environment as the highest risk.…”

Confusion, control and comfort: premediating identity management in film and television

“…Where research has considered how people relate to, embrace, or reject, identity management technologies (IMTs) in everyday life (e.g. Byun & Byun, 2013;Clodfelter, 2010;Hossain & Prybutok, 2008;James, Pirim, Boswell, Reithel, & Barkhi, 2006;Sanquist, Mahy, & Morris, 2008;Smith, 2008), it has typically assumed the citizen or the consumer to be a rational actor, making instrumental choices on the basis of perceived usefulness and efficiency. To do so, though, ignores the cultural narratives that precede and interact with the technologies and the ways in which they are understood.…”

How Might Crime-Scripts Be Used to Support the Understanding and Policing of Cloud Crime?

“…It is well known that members of the public, in general, struggle to understand the science behind cybercrime and cybersecurity and this problem is exacerbated by the different regulatory frameworks associated with cybercrime, thereby resulting in a confusing array of issues for the average citizen [41]. One key issue in setting-up an effective and robust evidence-chain that might lead to successful prosecution in the cloud crime arena concerns the way in which the underlying crimes may be communicated to key stakeholders and to the general public.…”