SeriouslyLost

Stats isn't your strong suit, is it? So long as they get ~500 or more results then they are likely statistically valid. That a majority of people here may dislike TSA may simply be a reflection of the wider population: the fact they dislike the TSA does not invalidate the results, no matter how much you might want that to be a reason to ignore the results - whatever they may be.

SeriouslyLost

Given the population numbers on FT, so long as they get a valid cross section of the membership participating and a high enough overall number then the results will be perfectly valid. I have some doubts about a few of the questions and the lack of check questions (eg. inverse correlation) but the results should be valid if they get over ~500 responses.

Accurate1

Thought better of it

pbarnette

Valid for what population? At best, you can extrapolate to the population that is readers of FT and/or frequentbusinesstraveler.com. Frankly, even then I think the "click on this link" method of sampling makes even that questionable.

It has been a while since I've taken statistics and survey design, but I do remember enough to know that statistics and survey design really aren't your "strong suit".

petrogradian

What would be interesting to me would be a question on the survey asking you to compare the effectiveness of TSA vs. the private contractors used prior to 9/11. And then a question rating the "efficiency" of the increased intrusiveness of TSA - ie, is the theoretical increase in safety proportionate to the additional effort?

SeriouslyLost

You're right, stats is not a strong suit for me. But I do remember enough from it for a discussion at the level we're talking here. ~500 people should be enough for a valid sample across the US population, assuming a well formed test series. And asking the FT community is no different from asking a completely random sample something like "Do you use X?" at the start of a survey of X: you're simply focusing on the population that you can reasonably expect to be able to answer questions about the subject. Certainly eyecue's statement of invalidity simply due to the population here being here isn't reasonable: at minimum eyecue's ignoring the possibility that the general criticism of TSA is real and informed. "That can't be a valid sample: they don't like us!" is begging the question entirely.

Ronlap

I was going through the pre-check line in Boston when I was selected for a random check. They swabbed my hands and put the fabric wipe into the machine which lit up with "Explosives Detected."

The TSA agent calmly steered me into a private room and two other agents followed. One was an observer and the other explained where he would be touching me and whether it would be palms in or palms out. After a rub down and examination of my carry on, I was free to go. Total time was under 10 minutes. Very professional.

jmsikora

While my experiences with the TSA have been generally positive (with the exception of too many of my tax dollars standing around waiting for something), the concept of the TSA has no way to be tested. By that I mean, all systems need to be tested to see if they should be sunsetted. Since the threat of a hijacking is indeterminate there can be no end to the TSA and the resulting expenditures. The TSA was put in place when there were no safeguards, no security doors on cockpits and no pervasive surveillance like we have now. But there is no way to determine if the TSA has lived well past their prime or should be cut back.

arturox2

Interesting conclusion. The world hasn't gotten any safer. How the TSA employees conduct themselves and how effective they are seem to be the key issues.

Xynix

Since I've been precheck (day 1 of it's initiation) I've had zero problems with the TSA. I'm not the average consumer though and I fly out of ATL where lines can often be 20-40 minutes in length. I don't feel that though as I simply bounce through my precheck line.

With that said there are airports (like BOS) where I just shake my head and wonder why after 12 years since 9/11 it's still being operated in the exact same way. With all the money being pumped into the TSA how can BOS still have 30+ minute lines every single day?

I'm not a TSA hater anymore than I'm a cop hater.. People hired to do a basic job lead by one of the most dysfunctional companies in America - the US Government.

I would answer that the TSA is a failed experiment. Not because of the ridicules lines and even more ridicules liquid and shoe rules though. Mostly because they have failed at stopping anything. All that money has produced zero results. So thumbs down TSA.

Baracuda618

I filled out the questionnaire but I think it's fairly ineffective. It didn't ask about procedures, just if you think the TSA is effective. The TSA personnel have, for the most part, been acceptable. The TSA policies are fairly ridiculous - taking off shoes when they are very flat, open sandals makes no sense. One of the most stupid rules I've found lately is that in Mexico you can bring fresh batteries into the country but if the TSA finds them in your bag going home they confiscate them! They have to be in your camera - no loose batteries. My boyfriend got a whole, unopened pack of AAA's confiscate last September coming out of Cozumel! Perhaps a more extensive survey would be more effective.

Linnea

Interesting...could not submit the survey because I have taken no business trips this year. I guess my opinion does not count!

cestmoi123

Did you even read what I wrote? It definitely DOES break down results by flying frequency. That was the first paragraph of my post. As I said:

"If you scroll down, you'll see responses by frequency of flight, and they're not materially different. For those who have flown at least 3x in the past year, Excellent/Good/Fair/Poor/Don't Know was 16/41/28/14/1, while it was 10/42/31/11/6 for those who hadn't flown, and 13/41/30/12/4 for the overall sample. So, the (somewhat) more frequent fliers were more likely to rate the TSA poor (14% vs 11%) than the non-flyers, but also more likely (16% vs 10%) to rate them excellent. "

cestmoi123

This is my question about the survey - given that it's being promoted in TS&S, I think the response rate will be higher from those of us who post here (who, I believe, tend to be more vocally anti-TSA than the flyertalk base as a whole), which could skew the results.

Rather than promoting it this way, it would have been better to send PMs to, say, 2000 randomly-selected flyertalkers, asking them to participate, and limiting participation to them.

cestmoi123

I think you see a bit of that in the Gallup data. Younger people were more likely to view the TSA as effective as older people were - I would hypothesize that this is because they don't really have anything to compare it to (since even 29 year olds weren't out of high school on 9/11, and 18 year olds were barely out of kindergarten).

"18-29 year olds were both more positive about the TSA than older respondents (67% excellent or good vs. 45% for 65-plus), _and_ more likely to have flown (60% 1x or more, vs. 33% for the 65-plus)."