By Calvin Biesecker
The Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) Behavior Detection Officers (BDO) do a better job at identifying high risk travelers than random screening measures, an official with the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Science and Technology (S&T) branch said yesterday.
A study by the American Institute for Research (AIR) that examined referrals for random screening at airports as well as referrals made by BDOs found that on average personnel trained in techniques to observe select behavioral indicators are nine times more likely to identify a high risk traveler than random methods, Larry Willis, the program manager within DHS S&T who is overseeing the study effort, told the House Science, Space and Technology Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight. AIR is a non-profit behavioral research organization.
TSA established the Screening of Passengers by Observational Techniques (SPOT) program in 2003 to add another layer of security to its screening efforts. BDOs are trained to look for certain clues given by people that may indicate harmful intent, whether for terror or criminal purposes.
Willis also said whereas nearly 72,000 travelers were selected at 33 airports through random screening during the 11-month test, BDOs identified a little more than 23,000 for additional screening. Moreover, of the 72,000 selected randomly, nine ended in arrests versus 151 arrested through the behavior detection techniques, he said.
Willis also said that of the 72,000-plus travelers referred for additional screening, very few people actually gave indications of harmful intent. Only 2.8 percent of randomly selected travelers displayed one of the behavioral indicators and less than 2 percent of travelers showed any of the other behavioral indicators that BDOs look for, he said.
“In conclusion these results indicate that the SPOT program is significantly more accurate than random screening in identifying high risk travelers by using the metrics that we employ,” Willis said.
Willis said that AIRs report was just delivered to DHS on Tuesday and must still be vetted by the department before it is released to Congress.
The hearing panel included experts in behavioral research as well as the Government Accountability Office. Stephen Lord, director of Homeland Security and Justice Issues at GAO, said that he hasn’t seen the AIR report and that to date there is still no scientific validation of the SPOT program. Lord also said that there is no scientific consensus that behavior techniques work to weed out travelers who may be terrorists or criminals.
Lord said that he’s surprised that TSA is requesting funding for additional BDOs in its FY ’12 budget before DHS has validated that the SPOT program works.
As to scientific research, two college professors at the hearing were on opposite sides of the issue. Paul Ekman, a professor emeritus of psychology at the Univ. of California- San Francisco and president of the Ekman Group, said the evidence shows that SPOT is an effective program and that behaviors of malintent can be physically observed. Ekman has worked with TSA for the past eight years to develop and improve SPOT.
However, Maria Hartwig, associate professor in the Department of Psychology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, said that a 30-year old body of research into behavior detection shows that people are poor at detecting deceptive behavior. She said there is no evidence that people can be systematically observed for concealing high stakes lies. Her conclusion is that SPOT is “out of step” with scientific research.
Hartwig did say that behavior techniques might be improved if verbal interviews with traveler are made part of the observation process.