比较电子学习和混合学习在机场安检x射线检查中的威胁检测

S. Michel, Nicole Hättenschwiler, Melina Zeballos, A. Schwaninger
{"title":"比较电子学习和混合学习在机场安检x射线检查中的威胁检测","authors":"S. Michel, Nicole Hättenschwiler, Melina Zeballos, A. Schwaninger","doi":"10.1109/CCST.2017.8167810","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study investigated the effectiveness of e-learning and blended learning for airport security officers (screeners) aimed at increasing their detection of novel prohibited items in X-ray images of passenger bags. 80 screeners from a large European airport conducted a simulated X-ray baggage screening task (SXBST). Based on hit- and false alarm rates, d-prime, age, gender and job experience, four equivalent screener groups were created. The first group (EL1) conducted six different e-learning modules. The second group (EL2) repeated the e-learning modules once with a predefined time interval of one week in-between. The third group (BL) participated in an asynchrony blended learning course where all participants first conducted the six e-learning modules followed by classroom training. The control group (CG) did neither conduct e-learning nor participate in the blended learning course. All four groups conducted the SXBST again after these interventions. Statistical analyses of the hit rates for novel prohibited items showed a significant main effect of group (EL1, EL2, BL, CG). Post-hoc tests showed that the increase of the hit rate for EL1 vs. CG, EL2 vs. CG and BL vs. CG was significant. Therefore, all interventions helped to increase the detection of novel prohibited items in X-ray images of passenger bags. Additionally, the hit rate for BL was significantly higher compared to EL1, which underlies the benefit of blended learning as a combination of classroom and online-training. The repetition of the e-learning modules (EL2) led to a marginally significant increase of the hit rate compared to EL1. The difference between EL2 and BL was not significant. This suggests that when training duration is controlled, the advantage of blended learning compared to e-learning vanishes. In addition, training did not impact false alarm rate as the main effect of group was not significant. Analysis of response times showed no speed-accuracy tradeoff but screeners needed significantly more time to analyze target-absent images than target-present images and this effect was independent of group. Overall, these findings suggest that e-learning as well as blended learning are effective to improve screeners' detection of novel prohibited items in X-ray images of passenger bags. Implications for X-ray image interpretation training for screeners are discussed.","PeriodicalId":371622,"journal":{"name":"2017 International Carnahan Conference on Security Technology (ICCST)","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing e-learning and blended learning for threat detection in airport security X-ray screening\",\"authors\":\"S. Michel, Nicole Hättenschwiler, Melina Zeballos, A. Schwaninger\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/CCST.2017.8167810\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study investigated the effectiveness of e-learning and blended learning for airport security officers (screeners) aimed at increasing their detection of novel prohibited items in X-ray images of passenger bags. 80 screeners from a large European airport conducted a simulated X-ray baggage screening task (SXBST). Based on hit- and false alarm rates, d-prime, age, gender and job experience, four equivalent screener groups were created. The first group (EL1) conducted six different e-learning modules. The second group (EL2) repeated the e-learning modules once with a predefined time interval of one week in-between. The third group (BL) participated in an asynchrony blended learning course where all participants first conducted the six e-learning modules followed by classroom training. The control group (CG) did neither conduct e-learning nor participate in the blended learning course. All four groups conducted the SXBST again after these interventions. Statistical analyses of the hit rates for novel prohibited items showed a significant main effect of group (EL1, EL2, BL, CG). Post-hoc tests showed that the increase of the hit rate for EL1 vs. CG, EL2 vs. CG and BL vs. CG was significant. Therefore, all interventions helped to increase the detection of novel prohibited items in X-ray images of passenger bags. Additionally, the hit rate for BL was significantly higher compared to EL1, which underlies the benefit of blended learning as a combination of classroom and online-training. The repetition of the e-learning modules (EL2) led to a marginally significant increase of the hit rate compared to EL1. The difference between EL2 and BL was not significant. This suggests that when training duration is controlled, the advantage of blended learning compared to e-learning vanishes. In addition, training did not impact false alarm rate as the main effect of group was not significant. Analysis of response times showed no speed-accuracy tradeoff but screeners needed significantly more time to analyze target-absent images than target-present images and this effect was independent of group. Overall, these findings suggest that e-learning as well as blended learning are effective to improve screeners' detection of novel prohibited items in X-ray images of passenger bags. Implications for X-ray image interpretation training for screeners are discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":371622,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2017 International Carnahan Conference on Security Technology (ICCST)\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2017 International Carnahan Conference on Security Technology (ICCST)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/CCST.2017.8167810\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2017 International Carnahan Conference on Security Technology (ICCST)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/CCST.2017.8167810","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

本研究调查了电子学习和混合学习对机场安检人员(安检人员)的有效性,旨在提高他们对旅客行李x光图像中新型违禁物品的检测。来自欧洲某大型机场的80名安检人员进行了一项模拟x光行李检查任务(SXBST)。根据击中率和误报率、d-prime、年龄、性别和工作经验,创建了四个相同的筛选组。第一组(EL1)进行了六个不同的电子学习模块。第二组(EL2)重复一次电子学习模块,中间间隔一周。第三组(BL)参加了一个异步混合学习课程,所有参与者首先进行了六个电子学习模块,然后进行了课堂培训。对照组(CG)既不进行电子学习,也不参加混合学习课程。所有四组在干预后再次进行SXBST。对新型违禁物品命中率的统计分析显示,组(EL1、EL2、BL、CG)的主效应显著。事后测试显示,EL1与CG、EL2与CG、BL与CG的命中率均有显著提高。因此,所有干预措施都有助于在旅客行李的x光图像中增加对新型违禁物品的检测。此外,与EL1相比,BL的命中率明显更高,这是混合学习作为课堂和在线培训结合的潜在好处。与EL1相比,重复的电子学习模块(EL2)导致命中率略微显着增加。EL2与BL差异不显著。这表明,当训练时间受到控制时,混合学习与电子学习相比的优势就消失了。此外,训练不影响误报率,组的主效应不显著。对反应时间的分析显示,没有速度和准确性的权衡,但筛选者需要更多的时间来分析目标缺失的图像,而不是目标存在的图像,这种影响与组无关。总的来说,这些发现表明,电子学习和混合学习可以有效提高安检人员对旅客行李x射线图像中新型违禁物品的检测。讨论了筛选人员x射线图像解译训练的意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparing e-learning and blended learning for threat detection in airport security X-ray screening
This study investigated the effectiveness of e-learning and blended learning for airport security officers (screeners) aimed at increasing their detection of novel prohibited items in X-ray images of passenger bags. 80 screeners from a large European airport conducted a simulated X-ray baggage screening task (SXBST). Based on hit- and false alarm rates, d-prime, age, gender and job experience, four equivalent screener groups were created. The first group (EL1) conducted six different e-learning modules. The second group (EL2) repeated the e-learning modules once with a predefined time interval of one week in-between. The third group (BL) participated in an asynchrony blended learning course where all participants first conducted the six e-learning modules followed by classroom training. The control group (CG) did neither conduct e-learning nor participate in the blended learning course. All four groups conducted the SXBST again after these interventions. Statistical analyses of the hit rates for novel prohibited items showed a significant main effect of group (EL1, EL2, BL, CG). Post-hoc tests showed that the increase of the hit rate for EL1 vs. CG, EL2 vs. CG and BL vs. CG was significant. Therefore, all interventions helped to increase the detection of novel prohibited items in X-ray images of passenger bags. Additionally, the hit rate for BL was significantly higher compared to EL1, which underlies the benefit of blended learning as a combination of classroom and online-training. The repetition of the e-learning modules (EL2) led to a marginally significant increase of the hit rate compared to EL1. The difference between EL2 and BL was not significant. This suggests that when training duration is controlled, the advantage of blended learning compared to e-learning vanishes. In addition, training did not impact false alarm rate as the main effect of group was not significant. Analysis of response times showed no speed-accuracy tradeoff but screeners needed significantly more time to analyze target-absent images than target-present images and this effect was independent of group. Overall, these findings suggest that e-learning as well as blended learning are effective to improve screeners' detection of novel prohibited items in X-ray images of passenger bags. Implications for X-ray image interpretation training for screeners are discussed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信