Profiling
“...we are in a bit of a to clear the suspicion and release the made by the profiler alone. The
passenger whenever possible. decision is a joint decision between
quandary. Discriminate Standardisation reduces the profiler and a supervisor. The
discrimination by ensuring the set supervisor rechecks the initial
and face the criteria are applied objectively and criteria that prompted the interview
uniformly. The profiler cannot and the profiler reports the details of
accusation of racism or arbitrarily apply a criteria of their own the interview conducted. In this way
pertaining to race, religion, or ethnicity the supervisor can ensure the
build a weak system and cannot bring their own personal procedure is being applied within the
opinion into the process. norms with no subjective influence.
that is ineffective...” Standardisation reduces the level of The supervisor can decide if the
discrimination and leaves no room for interview was done properly and also
appearance or travel documents. The abuse of procedures. has the opportunity to further
indicator will be presented, the profiler Supervision plays a key role in the interview the passenger or correct
will be prompted to react and the overall application of Comprehensive the process if necessary.
questions will be asked. Whoever the Profiling. The decision to “fail” the There is no effective 100% non-
profiler is, the outcome will be the passenger from the profiling process discriminatory profiling process for the
same. The objective of the interview is and move to the next level is not detection of illegal immigrants, terrorists
or drug smugglers. However, there are
ways to minimise discrimination by
developing a multi-tiered, clearly defined
system which can be closely monitored
and controlled.
Advances Made in Profiling
Procedures and Technology
Profiling systems traditionally rely on
negative indicators. Some more advanced
profiling systems include positive indicators
as well. Such so-called Positive Profiling
provides a favourable security impression of
some of the passengers. Positive indicators
can reduce the profiling requirement
allowing some passengers to move through
the process faster. In this way more time can
be dedicated to higher risk passengers. For
example, a top level frequent flier could be
considered a positive indicator since the
travel history of the passenger is known.
Positive criteria may be based on family
members travelling together, a passenger’s
age, or, perhaps, their nationality.
Profiling systems based solely on
computer analysis are currently being
used. These systems analyse ticket
details and, to a certain extent,
passport and flight history. The
shortcoming of these systems is the
lack of human interaction. A computer
cannot analyse behaviour, look into a
person’s eyes, read their body
language, listen to their speech and
examine baggage, dress, attitude, or
travelling companions. After being
employed for a short time, profilers
interviewing 50+ passengers a day, 5
days a week, gain valuable experience
in “reading” passengers. Check-in
agents are experts in looking at the
queue in front of their counter and
immediately identifying the passenger
32 Register now for FREE instant access to ASI online by visiting www.asi-mag.com October 2009 Aviationsecurityinternational
Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52