As part of a larger standardization study of the U.S. Air Force Criterion Task Set (CTS), a number of individual difference variables were assessed to evaluate their relationship to CTS performance. The selection of these individual difference variables was based on their known or hypothesized relationship to performance or perceptual abilities. This paper reports some of the preliminary findings with regard to these individual difference variables. Of the variables measured, Stimulus Screening, Thrill and Adventure Seeking, Neuroticism, Type–A Behavior, and General Intelligence showed the most promising relationships to CTS performance variables.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarrattE. (1965). Factor analysis of some psychometric measures of impulsiveness and anxiety. Psychological Reports, 16, 547–554.
2.
EysenckH.J.EysenckS.B.G. (1968). Manual for the Eysenck Personality Inventory. Educational and Industrial Testing Service, San Diego, California.
3.
GillilandK.SchlegelR.E. (1985). Evaluation of the Criterion Task Set for drug and stress research. USAF Contract F33615-82-D-0627 through Southeastern Center for Electrical Engineering Education (SCEEE-ARB/85–62).
4.
JenkinsCZyzanskiS.RosenmanR. (1979). Jenkins Activity Survey Manual. The Psychological Corporation, New York, New York.
5.
MehrabianA. (1976). Manual for the Questionnaire Measure of Stimulus Screening. Unpublished manuscript. Available from Albert Mehrabian, Los Angeles, California.
6.
MurphyD.L.BelmakerR.H.BuchsbaumM.MartinN.F.CiaranelloW.S.HyattR.J. (1977). Biogenic amine-related enzymes and personality variations in normals. Psychological Medicine, 7, 149–157.
7.
ReidG.B. (1982). Subjective workload assessment: A conjoint scaling approach. In the Proceedings of the Aerospace Medical Association Annual Scientific Meeting, pp. 153–154, Bal Harbor, Florida.
8.
ReidG.B.EggemeierF.T.NygrenT.E. (1982). An individual differences approach to SWAT Scale development. In the Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 26th Annual Meeting, pp. 639–642, Seattle, Washington.
9.
SarasonI.G. (1972). Experimental Approaches to Test Anxiety: Attention and the Uses of Information. In SpielbergerCD. (Ed.), Anxiety: Current trends in theory and research, Vol. II. New York: Academic Press.
10.
SchlegelR.E.GillilandK.SchlegelB. (1986). Development of the Criterion Task Set performance data base. In the Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 30th Annual Meeting, Dayton, Ohio.
11.
ShingledeckerC.A.ActonW.H.CrabtreeM.S. (1983) Development and application of a Criterion Task Set for workload metric evaluation. SAE Technical Paper 831419. Aerospace Congree & Exposition, Long Beach, California.
12.
SpielbergerCGorsuchR.LusheneR. (1970). Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Consulting Psychologist Press, Palo Alto, California.
13.
SternbergS. (1969). Scanning mental processes revealed by reaction time experiments. American Scientist, 57, 421–457.
14.
WickensCD. (1981). Processing Resources in Attention, Dual Task Performance, and Workload Assessment (Technical Report EPL-81-3). Uiversity of Illinois, Illinois: Engineering Psychology Research Laboratory.
15.
ZuckermanM. (1979). Sensation Seeking: Beyond the Optimal Level of Arousal. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
16.
ZuckermanM.KolinE.A.PriceL.ZoobI. (1964). Development of a Sensation Seeking Scale. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 28, 477–482.
