Examining perceptual and conceptual set biases in multiple-target visual search.

Visual search is a common practice conducted countless times every day, and one important aspect of visual search is that multiple targets can appear in a single search array. For example, an X-ray image of airport luggage could contain both a water bottle and a gun. Searchers are more likely to miss additional targets after locating a first target in multiple-target searches, which presents a potential problem: If airport security officers were to find a water bottle, would they then be more likely to miss a gun? One hypothetical cause of multiple-target search errors is that searchers become biased to detect additional targets that are similar to a found target, and therefore become less likely to find additional targets that are dissimilar to the first target. This particular hypothesis has received theoretical, but little empirical, support. In the present study, we tested the bounds of this idea by utilizing "big data" obtained from the mobile application Airport Scanner. Multiple-target search errors were substantially reduced when the two targets were identical, suggesting that the first-found target did indeed create biases during subsequent search. Further analyses delineated the nature of the biases, revealing both a perceptual set bias (i.e., a bias to find additional targets with features similar to those of the first-found target) and a conceptual set bias (i.e., a bias to find additional targets with a conceptual relationship to the first-found target). These biases are discussed in terms of the implications for visual-search theories and applications for professional visual searchers.

Prosthetic metal implants and airport metal detectors.

INTRODUCTION: Metal detectors have been present in airports and points of departure for some time. With the introduction of heightened security measures in response to fears of an increased threat of terrorism, they may become more prevalent in other public locations. The aim of this study was to ascertain which prosthetic devices activated metal detector devices used for security purposes. METHODS: A range of prosthetic devices used commonly in orthopaedic and plastic surgery procedures were passed through an arch metal detector at Birmingham Airport in the UK. Additionally, each item was passed under a wand detector. Items tested included expandable breast prostheses, plates used in wrist and hand surgery, screws, K-wires, Autosuture™ ligation clips and staples. RESULTS: No prostheses were detected by the arch detector. The expandable implants and wrist plates were the only devices detected by passing the wand directly over them. No device was detected by the wand when it was under cover of the axillary soft tissue. Screws, K-wires, Autosuture™ clips and staples were not detected under any of the study conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Although unlikely to trigger a detector, it is possible that an expandable breast prosthesis or larger plate may do so. It is therefore best to warn patients of this so they can anticipate detection and further examination.

Abatement of an aircraft exhaust plume using aerodynamic baffles.

The exhaust jet from a departing commercial aircraft will eventually rise buoyantly away from the ground; given the high thrust/power (i.e., momentum/buoyancy) ratio of modern aero-engines, however, this is a slow process, perhaps requiring ∼ 1 min or more. Supported by theoretical and wind tunnel modeling, we have experimented with an array of aerodynamic baffles on the surface behind a set of turbofan engines of 124 kN thrust. Lidar and point sampler measurements show that, as long as the intervention takes place within the zone where the Coanda effect holds the jet to the surface (i.e., within about 70 m in this case), then quite modest surface-mounted baffles can rapidly lift the jet away from the ground. This is of potential benefit in abating both surface concentrations and jet blast downstream. There is also some modest acoustic benefit. By distributing the aerodynamic lift and drag across an array of baffles, each need only be a fraction of the height of a single blast fence.

Risks of exposure to ionizing and millimeter-wave radiation from airport whole-body scanners.

Considerable public concern has been expressed around the world about the radiation risks posed by the backscatter (ionizing radiation) and millimeter-wave (nonionizing radiation) whole-body scanners that have been deployed at many airports. The backscatter and millimeter-wave scanners currently deployed in the U.S. almost certainly pose negligible radiation risks if used as intended, but their safety is difficult-to-impossible to prove using publicly accessible data. The scanners are widely disliked and often feared, which is a problem made worse by what appears to be a veil of secrecy that covers their specifications and dosimetry. Therefore, for these and future similar technologies to gain wide acceptance, more openness is needed, as is independent review and regulation. Publicly accessible, and preferably peer-reviewed evidence is needed that the deployed units (not just the prototypes) meet widely-accepted safety standards. It is also critical that risk-perception issues be handled more competently.