Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 10

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Perceived effectiveness and intrusiveness of school security countermeasures among parents, students, and staff

Byrd, Katie, Kapadia, Kevin, John, Richard·2025·Environment Systems and Decisions
DOI 10.1007/s10669-025-10004-7

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This study evaluates the perceptions of school security countermeasures among parents, recent students, and staff ( n = 1105) recruited via Prolific.com. The survey elicited participants’ perceptions of safety and countermeasure effectiveness and invasiveness. Results show broad acceptance of measures like emergency drills, door locks, and security cameras, while more invasive measures, including armed staff, bag inspections, and clear bag policies, generate discomfort. A binary logistic regression found that perceived safety was negatively predicted by a desire for additional countermeasures and positively predicted by perceptions of countermeasures as both comfortable and effective. Socioeconomic factors, like household income, were also positively related to students’ sense of safety. Future research should examine the broader impacts of security measures on student well-being and the school environment.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10669-025-10004-7

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 24

  1. Bachman R, Randolph A, Brown BL (2011) Predicting perceptions of fear at school and going to and from school for African American and white students: the effects of school security measures. Youth Soc 43(2):705–726. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X10366674 · DOI
  2. Beger RR (2003) The “worst of both worlds”: school security and the disappearing fourth amendment rights of students. Crim Justice Rev 28(2):336–354. https://doi.org/10.1177/073401680302800208 · DOI
  3. Booren LM, Handy DJ, Power TG (2011) Examining perceptions of school safety strategies, school climate, and violence. Youth Violence Juvenile Justice 9(2):171–187. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541204010374297 · DOI
  4. Brown B (2005) Controlling crime and delinquency in the schools: an exploratory study of student perceptions of school security measures. J Sch Violence 4(4):105–125. https://doi.org/10.1300/J202v04n04_07 · DOI
  5. Comer BP, Connolly EJ, Fuller MB (2023) An examination of Texas K-12 teachers’ opinions on teacher and staff gun carrying. J Sch Violence 23(3):279–292. https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2023.2289110 · DOI
  6. Crawford C, Burns R (2016) Reducing school violence: considering school characteristics and the impacts of law enforcement, school security, and environmental factors. Policing: Int J Police Strat Manag 39(3):455–477. https://doi.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-05-2016-0061 · DOI
  7. DeAngelis KJ, Brent BO, Ianni D (2011) The hidden cost of school security. J Educ Finance 36(3):312–337. https://doi.org/10.1353/jef.2011.0004 · DOI
  8. Ferraro KF (1995) Fear of crime: interpreting victimization risk. SUNY Press
  9. Fisher BW, Mowen TJ, Boman JH (2018) School security measures and longitudinal trends in adolescents’ experiences of victimization. J Youth Adolesc 47(6):1221–1237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-018-0818-5 · DOI
  10. Hollywood JS, Gierlack K, Moore PL, Goode T, Willis HH, Hill D, Ali R, Brothers A, Bauer RM, Tran J (2024) Improving the security of soft targets and crowded places: a landscape assessment. Rand
  11. Hsieh HF, Scott BA, Stoddard SA, Zimmerman MA, Kleinsasser MJ, Heinze J (2023) Exposure to violence at school and school-related promotive factors among adolescents in urban settings. J Sch Violence 22(3):367–382. https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2023.2186419 · DOI
  12. Jennings WG, Khey DN, Maskaly J, Donner CM (2011) Evaluating the relationship between law enforcement and school security measures and violent crime in schools. J Police Crisis Negotiat 11(2):109–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332586.2011.581511 · DOI
  13. Kitsantas A, Ware HW, Martinez-Arias R (2004) Students’ perceptions of school safety: effects by community, school environment, and substance use variables. J Early Adolesc 24(4):412–430. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431604268712 · DOI
  14. Longmuir F, McKay A, Gallo Cordoba B, Allen KA, Phillips M (2024) Australian teachers’ perceptions of safety, violence and limited support in their workplaces. J School Violence. https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2024.2385893 · DOI
  15. McCuddy T, Clark M, Guha A, McLeod EM (2024) A longitudinal examination of gun reporting by middle and high-school students. J School Violence. https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2024.2356562 · DOI
  16. Mowen TJ, Freng A (2019) Is more necessarily better? School security and perceptions of safety among students and parents in the United States. Am J Crim Justice 44(3):376–394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-018-9461-7 · DOI
  17. Peer E, Brandimarte L, Samat S, Acquisti A (2017) Beyond the Turk: alternative platforms for crowdsourcing behavioral research. J Exp Soc Psychol 70:153–163 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Peer E, Rothschild D, Gordon A, Evernden Z, Damer E (2021) Data quality of platforms and panels for online behavioral research. Behav Res Methods. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-021-01694-3 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Peer E, Rothschild D, Gordon A (2023) Platform over procedure: online platforms that pre-vet participants yield higher data quality without sacrificing diversity. Working Paper. · DOI
  20. Perumean-Chaney SE, Sutton LM (2013) Students and perceived school safety: the impact of school security measures. Am J Crimin Justice 38(4):570–588 · DOI
  21. Riehm KE, Mojtabai R, Adams LB, Krueger EA, Mattingly DT, Nestadt PS, Leventhal AM (2021) Adolescents’ concerns about school violence or shootings and association with depressive, anxiety, and panic symptoms. JAMA Netw Open 4(11):e2132131. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.32131 · DOI
  22. Schreck CJ, Miller JM (2003) Sources of fear of crime at school. J Sch Violence 2(4):57–79. https://doi.org/10.1300/J202v02n04_04 · DOI
  23. Tanner-Smith EE, Fisher BW, Addington LA, Gardella JH (2018) Adding security, but subtracting safety? Exploring schools’ use of multiple visible security measures. Am J Crim Justice 43(1):102–119. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-017-9409-3 · DOI
  24. Tessler H, Choi M, Kao G (2024) Feelings of safety and belonging in high school for Asian American students. J Sch Violence 23(2):187–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2023.2297034 · DOI

Cited by

See all 10

Metadata

Authors
Byrd, K., Kapadia, K., & John, R.
Venue
Environment Systems and Decisions
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2025-02-10
Volume
45
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 2194-5403
  • 2194-5411
DOI
10.1007/s10669-025-10004-7
Cited by
10
References
1
Language
en
Licence
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Homeland Security (22STESE00001-02-00)
  • University of Southern California

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Perceived effectiveness and intrusiveness of school security countermeasures among parents, students, and staff. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s10669-025-10004-7
The paper
Byrd, K., Kapadia, K., & John, R. (2025). Perceived effectiveness and intrusiveness of school security countermeasures among parents, students, and staff. Environment Systems and Decisions. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-025-10004-7

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.