Example Of Academic Work

Bilal Khan Measuring Canadian Opinion on Anti-Terrorism Legislation

Introduction: The purpose of this research project is to examine Canadian public opinion on antiterrorism legislation in relation to their civil rights and state security. This study will hope to illustrate how many key civil liberties urban based Canadians are willing to surrender in exchange for greater state protection against terrorism. However this question will be studied in relation to the opinion of Canadians regarding racial and religious minorities. As Canada is partially composed of major urban centres with varying levels of ethnic and cultural diversity (Millward Brown Goldfarb, 2005, p.14), this project will allow researchers to measure underlying issues pertaining to the general perception of ethnic minorities. When discussing the issue of tolerance within the context of multi-culturalism, researchers could use this study to analyze the aspects of security as a contributing factor to the majority’s opinion. The results of this project can potentially be used to analyze the effect and influence the state has on the majority’s perceptions of the minority. The issues surrounding terrorism and counterterrorism methods are becoming increasingly popular among policyanalysis think-tanks (Sjöberg, 2004, p.1-2). This project will draw heavily from the methodology and techniques used in American projects. American public opinion on this matter is urban based, and it suits the study as the September-11 attacks were committed against cities. The urban setting closely links the threat of terrorism, and the sample who in general would be most concerned. This study will use quantitative methods to acquire data; however the variables will be derived from concepts produced by previously done qualitative work on this issue. Literature Review: While social scientists from both Canada and the United States conducted research to

examine public opinion towards exchanging their civil liberties for greater state security, they used fundamentally different methods in their respective projects. Based on the studied literature, American methods were quantitative; researchers used empirical information to measure the sacrifice of civil liberties citizens would make in return for security against terrorism. Canadian work on this issue was primarily qualitative and data was acquired through the use of focus groups. Although different in methodology, the qualitative data of Canadian research augmented the concepts that were used to formulate the survey’s variables. Based on the research of Darren W. Davis and Brian D. Silver of both 2003 and 2004 on the extent of individual liberties American citizens would be willing to surrender. The root idea derived from the 2004 Davis and Silver study is that as people demand more civil rights, their support for state control decreases (p.3). This supports the basis of this project to examine how many liberties one would surrender in exchange for security. The issue is not the end goal of security itself, but the means to ensure it and its effects on individual civil rights (Davis & Silver, 2004, p.4). This study focuses on using specific contexts in survey questions to examine opinion, general abstract ideas cannot effectively be used in acquiring research (Davis & Silver, 2004, p.5). Using specific contexts gives people a better understanding of the situation, it may allow them to give more serious answers and subsequently strengthen the accuracy of the findings (Davis & Silver, 2004, p.2). Based on the literature, the surface issue applied for this research question is largely centred on the notion that civil liberties are “traded off” for greater security, and vice-versa (Viscusi & Zeckhauser, 2003, p.101). The Viscusi and Zeckhauser study focused on studying specific contexts of the surface issue, such as perceived discriminatory airport screenings of travellers of particular national backgrounds (p.103). The issue of perceived discriminatory

treatment towards certain ethnic groups is studied in all of the reviewed literature. In the context of post-9/11 terrorism, the trade off of civil liberties for security may seem to be their perception on how the minority group be treated (Viscusi & Zeckhauser, 2003, p.106). Essentially this draws in the concern of tolerance within a multi-cultural society, and utilizes the aspect of security and state-treatment to measure the issue. The issues studied for this question include respondents’ source of news or media (Pew, 2001, p.5-7); treatment at airports (Viscusi & Zeckhauser, 2003, p.103); and intelligence surveillance and tracking (Viscusi & Zeckhauser, 2003, p.107-108). The 2004 Davis and Silver study also took account of factors such as race, one’s party affiliation, age and level of education (p.8). The studies reviewed up to this point were all quantitative and conducted through surveys, predominately done by phone. The Viscusi and Zeckhauser study used Harvard Law students (p.100), but one would question the external validity of the results if acquired through their method. The Davis and Silver study had a sample of nearly 1500 respondents (2004, p.9), whereas a similar conceptual study by Lisa Finnegan Abdolian and Harold Takooshian had 309 respondents (2003, p.1442). Canadian research on this issue has been largely qualitative, and conducted through the use of focus groups. The Créatec project used 16 focus groups composed of Canadian minority groups from 5 provincial capitals (Créatec, 2003, p. 7). Their research found that Canadian minority groups were generally in favour of increased state power, although there was concern of issues such as ethnic profiling (p. 63). The Millward Brown Goldfarb study was organized using 22 focus groups from the capital cities of 7 provinces (Millward Brown Goldfarb, 2005, p. 7). Unlike the Créatec study, the Millward Brown Goldfarb study did not study specifically minorities, but rather a sample representing the Canadian population (p. 14). The study found

that Canadians feel comfortable with the ATA, but there was division on the issue of minorities. The external validity of the qualitative method should be called into question of whether it is a representative sample of the Canadian population, and possible subjective interpretation of respondents’ answers may have confounded the results. However the Créatec and Millward Brown Goldfarb studies do provide a good insight on issues most prevalent among Canadians when discussing anti-terrorism legislation. Theoretical Hypothesis: Based on the literature, there is a strong consensus to measure opinion and perception through the use of surveys. However qualitative studies, such as the Créatec and Millward Brown Goldfarb studies, provide us with insight and direction towards relevant public issues. 1. Level of education (secondary, post-secondary and so forth) will have a relationship with an individual’s decision to surrender specific civil liberties. The level of education was one of the key variables discussed by the Davis and Silver study (2004, p.8). His rationale behind choosing this variable is based on the largely recognized notion that individuals with higher education would be knowledgeable on the content and importance of constitutional rights. 2. There will be a relationship between one’s ethnic identity and their decision to surrender civil liberties. The 2003 study by Davis and Silver found correlations between one’s race and their decision to trade-off liberties for greater security (p.4). 3. Level of education will have a relationship with an individual’s opinion of whether it is lawful or ethically right for ethnic minorities to be potentially profiled for the greater good of the community.

Based on the literature, a general relationship is established where one’s level of education corresponds to their knowledge and understanding of civil liberty, and the implications of its practise towards all citizens. Method: Data Collection Design: To test this hypothesis, this project will use a survey design conducted through phone. In the literature, there was a consensus to study specific concerns through the use of surveys. This design will allow us to measure key prevailing issues among the urban Canadian community. It is expected that this method would yield responses from a more representative sample as compared to qualitative methods. Sample Design: The findings would be used to generalize the Canadian urban population. This sample would be generated using the process of Multi-Stage Cluster Sampling. This method will allow us to generate a sample representative of Canada’s population as it is a known means to acquire data from geographically expansive areas. It is a largely random method giving little discretion to us. However we do risk losing constituencies as samples, but the fact that this is a study to measure urban opinion, this may not be a serious issue. Measures: Education: This is a key independent variable that will allow us to measure perception and tolerance of outgroups, as well as willingness to surrender civil liberties. The question extracting this information will be the 3rd one on the survey:

3. Level of Education: a) 0-11 Years b) High School Graduate c) Some University or College d) University or College Graduate e) Advanced Degree This question is based on an exact model given by the 2004 Davis and Silver study (p.21). This is a valid variable as it is often cited as a factor to account for when measuring people’s knowledge on the issue of constitutional rights. Level of education is also correlated to people’s opinions of others, particularly ethnic minorities. Ethnic Identity: A key independent variable that will allow us to measure one’s willingness to surrender their civil liberties in relation to race. The 2003 Davis and Silver study made note of historical attributes contributing to general opinion of African Americans and their reluctance to surrender civil liberties for greater state security (p.4). The question that will yield this information is the 4th one on the survey: 4. Please identify your racial group: a) African/Black b) South Asian c) East Asian d) West Asian/Middle Eastern e) Latin American f) White g) Mixed Willingness to surrender civil liberties: A key dependent variable relying on the results of one’s level of education and ethnic identification. While a series of questions will analyze this variable, the key question is the 5th one on the survey: “5. Next I am going to read you a series of two statements. Please tell me which one you agree

with most. a. In order to curb terrorism in this country, it will be necessary to give up some civil liberties. b. We should preserve our freedoms above all, even if there remains some risk of terrorism?” This question is an exact replica from the 2004 Davis and Silver study (p.21). While it is a direct question, it provides a ground to have produce a general but basic relationship with the respondent’s independent variables. Beyond this we can go into specific details and see how far the respondent would go in surrendering their rights as well as consideration of state treatment of minorities. Support for racial profiling. A dependent variable based on the results of one’s level of education. While multiple questions will seek to answer different aspects of this variable, an overarching one is as follows as the 6th question on the survey: “6. Some people say that law enforcement should be able to stop or detain people of certain racial or ethnic backgrounds if these groups are thought to be more likely to commit crimes. This is called racial profiling. Others think racial profiling should not be done because it harasses many innocent people just because of their race or ethnicity. Which of these opinions do you agree with most?” This is an exact replica of Civil Liberties question in the 2004 Davis and Silver study (p.21). Based on the literature, there is a consensus that education is related to a person’s opinion on the issue of racial profiling. This variable is a significant focus of this study. Procedures: We hope to mirror the 2004 Davis and Silver study in carrying out this research. As previously stated, this project will use a Multi-Stage Cluster Frame to acquire a sample. The use of this frame will allow us to access respondents from around Canada, but specifically from provincial capitals. The number of surveys injected in each city will be proportional to the local

population. By focusing the study towards urban centres, we do not expect to lose many constituencies from the representative sample. We will administer the survey through random dialling within the urban clusters of persons above the age of 18. In order to generate an accurate representative sample, we will set a proportion based on the independent variables. In the Davis and Silver study, it is noted that they received an over-sampling of African and Hispanic Americans (2004, p.9). So based on national estimates, we will interview a proportional number of persons in terms of education, ethnic identity and residency. While this entails discretion on our part, it will simply be an issue of proportional representation and will augment our case for studying a representative sample. Based on the 2004 Davis and Silver study, the average interview may take 10 minutes (p.9) as we will half the number of questions he posed. Based on this literature, we expect a completion rate of 50-55% and a refusal rate of 15-20%. Working Hypothesis: 1. Level of education is the IV and surrender of Civil Rights the DV. We expect a relationship where better educated respondents will be reluctant to surrender their civil liberties. 2. Ethnic identity is IV and surrender of Civil Rights is DV. We expect those identifying as ethnic minorities will be reluctant to surrender their civil liberties. 3. Level of education is IV and concern of racial profiling as DV. We expect those with lower levels of education to be supportive of possible racial profiling of ethnic minorities.

Budget: Cost of administering survey (Apostol & Irvine, Estimating Telephone Survey Costs) - At a rate of $10 per interview for 10 minutes: 10 x 3000 persons = $30 000. -We must account for a probable 20% refusal rate. -Refusals may take 4 minutes to occur, accounting for $2 out of $10 for cost. - .20 x 3000 = 600 refusals - 600 x $3 = $1200 -$30 000 - $1800 = $28 200 Procurement of CATI Package (Creative Research Systems) -Professional Management Edition = $3998. -30 Interview Stations = $1900 -$3998 + $1900 = $5898 Total Budget: - 28 200 + 5898 = 34 098

Bibliography Abdolian, L. F., & Takooshian, H. (2003, May 1). The USA PATRIOT Act: Civil Liberties, the Media, and Public Opinion. Fordham Urban Law Journal , pp. 1429-1453. Apostol, T., & Irvine, R. (2003). Estimating Telephone Survey Research Costs. Retrieved November 19, 2008, from http://www.westgroupresearch.com/research/phonecosts.html Créatec. (2003, March). Minority Views on the Canadian Anti-Terrorism Act. Retrieved 09 24, 2008, from Department of Justice Canada: www.doj.ca/eng/pi/rs/rep-rap/2003/rr03_4/rr03_4.pdf Creative Research Systems. (2008). Web Package for Internet Surveys. Retrieved November 19, 2008, from http://www.surveysystem.com/packages.htm Davis, D.W., and B.D. Silver. 2003. Continuity and Change in Support for Civil Liberties After 9/11: Results of a Panel Study. Department of Political Science Michigan State University East Lansing, MI 48824-1032: 1-37 Davis, D. W., and B. D. Silver. 2004. Civil liberties vs. security: Public opinion in the context of the terrorist attacks on America. American Journal of Political Science 48 (1): 28–46. Millward Brown Goldfarb. (2005, March 21). Public Views of the Anti-Terrorism Act. Retrieved 09 24, 2008, from Department of Justice Canada: http://canada.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/rs/reprap/2005/rr05_3/rr05_3.pdf Pew Research Center. 2001. American Psyche Reeling From Terror Attacks. http://peoplepress.org/reports. Accessed November 11, 2002. Sjöberg, L. 2005. The perceived risk of terrorism. Risk Management: An International Journal 7, 43-61. Viscusi, W. K., & Zeckhauser, R. J. 2003. Sacrificing civil liberties to reduce terrorism risks. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 26, 99-120.

Survey: 1. I will read out 4 age groups – all inclusive. Please select the one you identify with: a. 18-29 b. 30-49 c. 50-59 d. Above 60 2. I will read out 4 ranges of income – all inclusive. Please select the one you identify with: a. Under $19 999 b. $20 000-49 999 c. $50 000-79 999 d. $80 000-109 999 e. Above $110 000 3. I will read out 5 ranges of education level. Please select one you identify with: a) 0-11 Years b) High School Graduate c) Some University or College d) University or College Graduate e) Advanced Degree 4. I will read out 7 racial groups. Please select one you most identify with: a) African/Black b) South Asian c) East Asian d) West Asian/Middle Eastern e) Latin American f) White g) Mixed 5. Next I am going to read you a series of two statements. Please tell me which one you agree with most. a. In order to curb terrorism in this country, it will be necessary to give up some civil liberties. b. We should preserve our freedoms above all, even if there remains some risk of terrorism?”

6. Some people say that law enforcement should be able to stop or detain people of certain racial or ethnic backgrounds if these groups are thought to be more likely to commit crimes. This is called racial profiling. Others think racial profiling should not be done because it harasses many innocent people just because of their race or ethnicity. Which of these opinions do you agree with most?” 7. Some people say it should be a crime for anyone to belong to or contribute money to any organization that supports international terrorism. Others say that a person’s guilt or innocence should not be determined only by who they associate with or the organizations to which they belong. Which of these opinions do you agree with most? 8. Some people say that law enforcement should be free to search a property without a warrant solely on the suspicion that a crime or a terrorist act is being planned there. Others say that protection against searches without a warrant is a basic right that should not be given up for any reason. Which of these opinions do you agree with most? 9. Some people say that government should be allowed to record telephone calls and monitor email in order to prevent people from planning terrorist or criminal acts. Others say that people’s conversations and e-mail are private and should be protected by the constitution. Which of these opinions do you agree with most?