Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Editor-in-Chief: Renda-Tanali, Irmak
Managing Editor: McGee, Sibel, Ph.D.
4 Issues per year
IMPACT FACTOR increased in 2014: 0.406
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.481
SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2014: 0.217
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2014: 0.429
Impact per Publication (IPP) 2014: 0.333
Volume 12 (2015)
Volume 11 (2014)
Volume 7 (2010)
Volume 6 (2009)
Volume 5 (2008)
Most Downloaded Articles
- Disaster Resilience Indicators for Benchmarking Baseline Conditions by Cutter, Susan L./ Burton, Christopher G. and Emrich, Christopher T.
- The Evolving Role of the Public Information Officer: An Examination of Social Media in Emergency Management by Hughes, Amanda L. and Palen, Leysia
- A Social Vulnerability Index for Disaster Management by Flanagan, Barry E./ Gregory, Edward W./ Hallisey, Elaine J/ Heitgerd, Janet L. and Lewis, Brian
- A Critical Evaluation of the Incident Command System and NIMS by Buck, Dick A/ Trainor, Joseph E and Aguirre, Benigno E.
Evaluating the Societal Response to Antiterrorism Measures
1University of Florida
Citation Information: Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management. Volume 3, Issue 2, ISSN (Online) 1547-7355, DOI: 10.2202/1547-7355.1170, June 2006
- Published Online:
Emergency managers, urban planners and building designers have embraced antiterrorism measures to create a human environment that is difficult to attack, resilient to the consequences of terrorist attack, and protective of its populations and assets. However, quick to adopt a "guns, guards and gates" posture following 911, it has become apparent that many antiterrorism measures may actually intensify and reinforce public perceptions of vulnerability and fear. Two studies conducted by the University of Florida in 2004-05 evaluated public perceptions of security measures within the contexts of traditional crime and terrorism. When presented with images of interior and exterior building spaces, respondents felt 3-6 times less vulnerable to theft, battery and sexual assault in areas having a visible security presence. Only a minority of respondents considered areas with a highly visible security presence to be unfriendly (6%), uninviting (12%) or uncomfortable (13%). In the context of terrorism however, respondents viewed many of the same visible security measures with suspiciousness, tenseness and fear. Such responses may be caused by a comparative lack of understanding of the nature and predictability of terrorism and a reluctance to accept measures that serve to reinforce feelings of vulnerability or danger.
Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.