Campbell Justin S, Ruiz Mark A, Moore Jeffery L
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Andrews Campus, 316 FSS/FSDE, 1413 Arkansas Rd., Andrews AFB, MD 20762-6405, USA.
Aviat Space Environ Med. 2010 Sep;81(9):864-8. doi: 10.3357/asem.2761.2010.
The present study revisited a large sample of clinically referred military aviators, previously evaluated across factors of the Five Factor Model of personality (FFM), to determine whether identified facet differences were consistent with U.S. Navy guidelines for evaluating aeronautical adaptability.
Clinically evaluated U.S. Naval aviators and flight officers (N = 954) disposed as either aeronautically adaptable (AA) or not aeronautically adaptable (NAA) were compared with respect to their facet level scores on the NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R). Additional analyses were conducted to control for NAA status attributable to physical as opposed to psychological standards and for student versus designated aviator/flight officer experience levels.
NAA aviators and flight officers, when compared to their AA counterparts, evidenced significant and substantive effect size differences on facets measuring negative emotionality, interpersonal effectiveness, and goal-orientation.
FFM facet differences between AA and NAA officers were only partially consistent with U.S. Navy guidelines; expected facet differences related to compliance, deliberation, actions, and excitement-seeking/impulsivity were not observed.
本研究重新审视了一大群临床转介的军事飞行员样本,这些飞行员此前已根据五因素人格模型(FFM)的各个因素进行了评估,以确定所识别的方面差异是否符合美国海军评估航空适应性的指南。
将经临床评估的美国海军飞行员和飞行军官(N = 954)分为航空适应性强(AA)或航空适应性不强(NAA)两类,比较他们在《大五人格量表》(NEO PI-R)上的方面水平得分。还进行了额外的分析,以控制因身体而非心理标准导致的NAA状态,以及学生与指定飞行员/飞行军官经验水平的差异。
与AA类飞行员和飞行军官相比,NAA类在测量负面情绪、人际效能和目标导向的方面存在显著且实质性的效应量差异。
AA类和NAA类军官在FFM方面的差异仅部分符合美国海军指南;未观察到与合规性、深思熟虑、行动以及寻求刺激/冲动性相关的预期方面差异。