Advertisement

Risk Cognition Variables and Flight Exceedance Behaviors of Airline Transport Pilots

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10906)

Abstract

In order to examine the relationship between risk cognitive variables and flight exceedance behaviors of airline transport pilots, the concepts of ‘risky pilots’ was put forward, and the existence of ‘risky pilots’ was verified based on flight exceedance events statistics. Three risk cognitive variables of pilots involving risk tolerance, hazardous attitude and risk perception were investigated through the use of a series of psychological scales. Then one-way ANOVA and Pearson Correlation Analysis were used to study the influence of risk cognitive variables on airline transport pilots’ exceedance behaviors. Results indicated that ‘risky pilots’ do exist among airline transport pilots. Additionally, a hazardous attitude has significant positive effects on pilots’ severe exceedance behaviors, which means that pilots who have high levels of a hazardous attitude would cause exceedance behaviors easily and induce higher occurrence rates of unsafe events. The conclusion of the study indicates that targeted education and training for improving risky pilots’ hazardous attitudes should be carried out for the purpose of reducing exceedance behaviors in flight, which would then make flight safer.

Keywords

Risk cognition Exceedance behaviors Risky pilots Flight data Safety 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We appreciate the support of this work from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. U1733117) and the National Key Research and Development Program of China (Grant No. 2016YFB0502405).

References

  1. 1.
    Greenwood, M.: Accident proneness. Biometrika 37(1/2), 24–29 (1950)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Li, Z., Sun, J.T., Xu, K.H., Chen, Y.X., Zhao, S.M.: Predicting accident proneness of pilot with Eysenck personality questionnaire. Chin. J. Aerosp. Med. 10(4), 234–236 (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yan, H.: Building model for relationship between road traffic accident and drivers’ psychological quality. China Saf. Sci. J. 26(2), 13–17 (2016)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hunter, D.R.: Risk perception and risk tolerance in aircraft pilots (Report No. DOT/FAA/AM-02/17). Federal Aviation Administration Office of Aviation Medicine, Washington DC (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pauley, K., O’Hare, D., Wiggins, M.: Risk tolerance and pilot involvement in hazardous events and flight into adverse weather. J. Saf. Res. 39(4), 403–411 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    O’Hare, D.: Pilots’ perception of risks and hazards in general aviation. Aviat. Space Environ. Med. 61(7), 599–603 (1990)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Platenius, P.H., Wilde, G.J.: Personal characteristics related to accident histories of Canadian pilots. Aviat. Space Environ. Med. 60(1), 42–45 (1989)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wiggins, M., Connan, N., Morris, C.: Weather-related decision making and self-perception amongst pilots. In: Haywood, B.J., Lowe, A.R. (eds.) Applied Aviation Psychology: Achievement, Change and Challenge, Proceedings of 3rd Australian Psychology Symposium, pp. 193–200. Avebury Ashgate Publishing Ltd., Aldershot (1996)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Berlin, J.I., Gruber, E.V., Holmes, C.W., Jensen, P.K., Lau, J.R., Mills, J.W.: Pilot judgment training and evaluation (Report No. DOT/FAA/CT-81/56-I), vol. 1. Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, DC (1982)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Federal Aviation Administration: Aeronautical decision making. Advisory Circular: 60–22 FAA, Washington, DC (1991)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ji, M., You, X.Q., Lan, J.J., Yang, S.Y.: The impact of risk tolerance, risk perception and hazardous attitude on safety operation among airline pilots in China. Saf. Sci. 49(10), 1412–1420 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tränkle, U., Gelau, C., Metker, T.: Risk perception and age-specific accidents of young drivers. Accid. Anal. Prev. 22(2), 119–125 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Civil Aviation Administration of China: Implementation and management of flight operation quality assurance. Advisory Circular: 121/135–FS–2012–45. CAAC, Beijing (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yang, Y.X.: Research on flight operation risk based on quick access recorder data. Unpublished Master’s dissertation, Civil Aviation University of China (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wang, L., Sun, R.S., Wu, C.X., Cui, Z.X., Lu, Z.: A flight QAR data based model for hard landing risk quantitative evaluation. China Saf. Sci. J. 24(2), 88–92 (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wang, L., Wu, C.X., Sun, R.S.: An analysis of flight Quick Access Recorder (QAR) data and its applications in preventing landing incidents. Reliabil. Eng. Syst. Saf. 127, 86–96 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wang, L., Wu, C., Sun, R., Cui, Z.: An analysis of hard landing incidents based on flight QAR data. In: Harris, D. (ed.) EPCE 2014. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 8532, pp. 398–406. Springer, Cham (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07515-0_40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wang, L., Wu, C., Sun, R.: Pilot operating characteristics analysis of long landing based on flight QAR data. In: Harris, D. (ed.) EPCE 2013. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 8020, pp. 157–166. Springer, Heidelberg (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39354-9_18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wang, L., Ren, Y., Wu, C.X.: Effects of flare operation on landing safety: a study based on ANOVA of real flight data. Saf. Sci. 102, 14–25 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ji, M., Liu, Z., Yang, S.Y., Bao, X.H., You, X.Q.: A study on the relationship between hazardous attitudes and safe operation behaviors among airline pilots in China. J. Psychol. Sci. 35(1), 202–207 (2012)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wilkening, H.E.: The Psychology Almanac. Brooks/Cole, Monterey (1973)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hunter, D.R.: Measurement of hazardous attitudes among pilots. Int. J. Aviat. Psychol. 15(1), 23–43 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hunter, D.R., Stewart, J.E.: Locus of control, risk orientation, and decision making among U.S. army aviators. Technical report No. 1260, Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (DTIC No. ADA452056), Arlington (2009)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Buch, G., Diehl, A.: An investigation of the effectiveness of pilot judgment training. Hum. Fact.: J. Hum. Fact. Ergon. Soc. 26(5), 557–564 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Diehl, A.E.: The effectiveness of training programs for preventing aircrew ‘error’. In: Jensen, R.S. (eds.) Proceedings of 6th International Symposium on Aviation Psychology, pp. 640–655. Ohio State University, Columbus (1991)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Flight Technology CollegeCivil Aviation University of ChinaTianjinChina

Personalised recommendations