• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

理解海军航空事故中的人为失误。

Understanding Human Error in Naval Aviation Mishaps.

机构信息

Naval Safety Center, Norfolk, Virginia.

出版信息

Hum Factors. 2018 Sep;60(6):763-777. doi: 10.1177/0018720818771904. Epub 2018 Apr 26.

DOI:10.1177/0018720818771904
PMID:29698102
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To better understand the external factors that influence the performance and decisions of aviators involved in Naval aviation mishaps.

BACKGROUND

Mishaps in complex activities, ranging from aviation to nuclear power operations, are often the result of interactions between multiple components within an organization. The Naval aviation mishap database contains relevant information, both in quantitative statistics and qualitative reports, that permits analysis of such interactions to identify how the working atmosphere influences aviator performance and judgment.

METHOD

Results from 95 severe Naval aviation mishaps that occurred from 2011 through 2016 were analyzed using Bayes' theorem probability formula. Then a content analysis was performed on a subset of relevant mishap reports.

RESULTS

Out of the 14 latent factors analyzed, the Bayes' application identified 6 that impacted specific aspects of aviator behavior during mishaps. Technological environment, misperceptions, and mental awareness impacted basic aviation skills. The remaining 3 factors were used to inform a content analysis of the contextual information within mishap reports. Teamwork failures were the result of plan continuation aggravated by diffused responsibility. Resource limitations and risk management deficiencies impacted judgments made by squadron commanders.

CONCLUSION

The application of Bayes' theorem to historical mishap data revealed the role of latent factors within Naval aviation mishaps. Teamwork failures were seen to be considerably damaging to both aviator skill and judgment.

APPLICATION

Both the methods and findings have direct application for organizations interested in understanding the relationships between external factors and human error. It presents real-world evidence to promote effective safety decisions.

摘要

目的

更好地了解影响海军航空兵事故中飞行员表现和决策的外部因素。

背景

从航空到核电运营等复杂活动中的事故往往是组织内部多个组件相互作用的结果。海军航空兵事故数据库包含相关信息,包括定量统计数据和定性报告,这些信息允许分析这些相互作用,以确定工作氛围如何影响飞行员的表现和判断。

方法

使用贝叶斯定理概率公式对 2011 年至 2016 年期间发生的 95 起严重海军航空兵事故的结果进行了分析。然后对相关事故报告的一个子集进行了内容分析。

结果

在分析的 14 个潜在因素中,贝叶斯应用确定了 6 个因素影响了事故中飞行员行为的特定方面。技术环境、误解和心理意识影响了基本的航空技能。其余 3 个因素用于对事故报告中的背景信息进行内容分析。团队合作失败是由于计划继续执行而加剧的责任扩散造成的。资源限制和风险管理缺陷影响了中队指挥官的判断。

结论

贝叶斯定理在历史事故数据中的应用揭示了海军航空兵事故中潜在因素的作用。团队合作失败对飞行员的技能和判断都有很大的影响。

应用

对有兴趣了解外部因素与人为错误之间关系的组织来说,该方法和发现具有直接的应用价值。它提供了现实世界的证据,以促进有效的安全决策。

相似文献

1
Understanding Human Error in Naval Aviation Mishaps.理解海军航空事故中的人为失误。
Hum Factors. 2018 Sep;60(6):763-777. doi: 10.1177/0018720818771904. Epub 2018 Apr 26.
2
Aeromedical waiver status in U.S. Naval aviators involved in Class A mishaps.美国海军飞行员在A级事故中的航空医疗豁免状态。
Aviat Space Environ Med. 2002 Aug;73(8):791-7.
3
Human error and crew resource management failures in Naval aviation mishaps: a review of U.S. Naval Safety Center data, 1990-96.海军航空事故中的人为失误与机组资源管理故障:对美国海军安全中心1990 - 1996年数据的回顾
Aviat Space Environ Med. 1999 Dec;70(12):1147-51.
4
Human factors in remotely piloted aircraft operations: HFACS analysis of 221 mishaps over 10 years.遥控飞机操作中的人为因素:对10年间221起事故的HFACS分析
Aviat Space Environ Med. 2006 Jul;77(7):724-32.
5
Mishap trends and cause factors in naval aviation: a review of Naval Safety Center data, 1986-90.海军航空事故趋势及成因:对海军安全中心1986 - 1990年数据的回顾
Aviat Space Environ Med. 1993 May;64(5):392-5.
6
Recurrent error pathways in HFACS data: analysis of 95 mishaps with remotely piloted aircraft.HFACS数据中的反复出现的错误路径:对95起遥控飞机事故的分析。
Aviat Space Environ Med. 2008 May;79(5):525-32. doi: 10.3357/asem.2002.2008.
7
Spatial disorientation in naval aviation mishaps: a review of class A incidents from 1980 through 1989.海军航空事故中的空间定向障碍:对1980年至1989年A类事故的回顾
Aviat Space Environ Med. 1992 Feb;63(2):128-31.
8
Flight experience and the likelihood of U.S. Navy aircraft mishaps.飞行经验与美国海军飞机事故的可能性。
Aviat Space Environ Med. 1992 Jan;63(1):72-4.
9
Human factors in maintenance: impact on aircraft mishap frequency and severity.维修中的人为因素:对飞机事故频率和严重程度的影响。
Aviat Space Environ Med. 2004 May;75(5):429-32.
10
A comparison of leading and lagging indicators of safety in naval aviation.
Aviat Space Environ Med. 2010 Jul;81(7):677-82. doi: 10.3357/asem.2734.2010.

引用本文的文献

1
Systems analysis of clinical incidents: development of a new edition of the London Protocol.临床事件的系统分析:新版《伦敦协议》的制定
BMJ Qual Saf. 2025 May 19;34(6):413-420. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2024-017987.
2
Photoplethysmography behind the Ear Outperforms Electrocardiogram for Cardiovascular Monitoring in Dynamic Environments.耳后光体积描记法在动态环境下的心血管监测中优于心电图。
Sensors (Basel). 2021 Jul 2;21(13):4543. doi: 10.3390/s21134543.