A method of depicting crew climate using a group diagram based on behavioral ratings is described. Behavioral ratings were made of twelve three-person professional airline cockpit crews in full-mission simulations. These crews had been part of an earlier study in which captains had been had been grouped into three personality types, based on pencil and paper pre-tests. We found that low error rates were related to group climate variables as well as positive captain behaviors.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BalesR. F.CohenS. P. (1979). SYMLOG: A system for the multiple level observation of groups.. N. Y.: The Free Press.
2.
ChidesterT. R.KankiB. G.FousheeH. C.DickinsonC. L.BowlesS. V. (1990). Personality factors in flight operations: Vol. 1. Leader characteristics and crew performance in a full mission air transport simulation. NASA Technical Memorandum #102259.
3.
FineG. A. (1986). Behavioral change in group space: A reintegration of Lewinian theory in small group research. Advances in Group Processes, 3, 23–50.
4.
HelmrichR. L.FousheeH. C. (1993). Why crew resource management? Empirical and theoretical bases of human factors training in aviation. In WienerE. L.KankiB. G.HelmreichR. L. (Eds.), Cockpit resource management.San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
5.
KankiB. G.PalmerM. T.VeinottE. (1991). Communication variations related to leader personality. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Aviation Psychology (pp. 253–259). Columbus: Ohio State University.
6.
MurrayL.EastmanJ.OrasanuJ.RodvoldM. A.TyzzerL. K.Has CRM succeeded too well?Assertiveness on the flight deck. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Symposium on Aviation Psychology, pp. 357–360. Columbus, Ohio State University.
7.
ParkeB. (1985) A field adaptation to the SYMLOG Adjective Rating Form suitable for populations including children. International Journal of Small Group Research, 1, 89–95.
8.
ParkeB.HoubenH. C. (1985). An objective analysis of group types. International Journal of Small Group Research, 1, 131–150.
9.
ParkeB.HoubenH. C. (1988). Analyses of subgroups and clusterings within groups: Attaining knowledge of the social interaction potential. International Journal of Small Group Research, 4, 143–158.
10.
WagnerD. G.BergerJ. (1998). Gender and interpersonal task behaviors: Status expectation accounts. In BergerJ.ZelditchM. (Eds.), Status, Power, & Legitimacy.New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.
