应急救援团队中大五人格对TSA的影响:一个双调节模型

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2020.10.022

中国安全科学学报 ›› 2020, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (10): 156-163.doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2020.10.022

应急救援团队中大五人格对TSA的影响:一个双调节模型

姜卉¹ 教授, 文冠群¹, 王振雄² 副教授

1 中国科学院大学工程科学学院,北京 100049;
2 中国人民警察大学救援指挥学院,河北廊坊 065000

收稿日期:2020-07-23 修回日期:2020-09-16 出版日期:2020-10-28 发布日期:2021-07-15
作者简介:姜卉 (1976—),女,辽宁阜新人,博士,教授,主要从事应急决策、应急管理等方面的研究。E-mail: huijiang@ucas.ac.cn。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金资助(71673260);中国科学院大学校部教师与研究所科研合作专项基金资助。

Influence of big five personality on TSA of emergency rescue team: a model with dual moderating effects

JIANG Hui¹, WEN Guanqun¹, WANG Zhenxiong²

1 School of Engineering Science, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China;
2 Fire Command Department, China People's Police University, Langfang Hebei 065000, China

Received:2020-07-23 Revised:2020-09-16 Online:2020-10-28 Published:2021-07-15

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为探寻应急救援团队中团队情境意识(TSA)的形成机制,明确人格、个体情境意识(ISA)和社会网络关系等因素在形成过程中发挥的作用,实证研究以上变量之间的关系。选取中国人民警察大学消防指挥系364名大四学员作为被试,分为40小组,以营救地震后倒塌建筑物中被困人员为任务情境开展试验,收集被试的ISA数据和每个小组的TSA数据;通过线上问卷收集被试大五人格数据和日常合作网络密度(CND)数据;通过回归分析,构建一个以大五人格的开放性维度和神经质维度为自变量,以ISA和CND为调节变量的双调节模型。结果表明:开放性正向预测TSA,团队整体的开放性越高,TSA越高;神经质负向预测TSA,团队整体的神经质越低,TSA越高;团队内ISA平均水平的提升可增强开放性和神经质对TSA的预测作用,CND的提升可减弱开放性和神经质对TSA的预测作用。

关键词: 应急救援, 大五人格, 团队情境意识(TSA), 调节作用, 合作网络密度(CND)

Abstract: In order to explore formation mechanism of TSA for emergency rescue teams, and to clarify influence of personality, individual situation awareness (ISA) and social network relationship on its formation, relationships between these variables were empirically studied. Firstly, 364 senior students from fire command department of China people's Police University, selected as participants, were divided into 40 teams to rescue trapped victims in collapsed buildings after an earthquake, and their ISA and TSA data were collected during this drill. Then, their Big Five personality and daily CND data were acquired by online questionnaires. Finally, a dual regulation model with Openness dimension and neuroticism dimension from Big Five personality as independent variables and ISA and CND as moderating variables was constructed by regression analysis. The results indicate that Openness positively predicts TSA, and the higher Openness a team has, the higher TSA there will be. However, neuroticism negatively predicts TSA, and the lower neuroticism, the higher TSA there will be. Improvement of average ISA can enhance predictive effects of these two factors above while improvement of CND does the opposite.

Key words: emergency rescue, big five personality, team situation awareness (TSA), moderating effect, cooperation network density (CND)

中图分类号:

X928.04

姜卉, 文冠群, 王振雄. 应急救援团队中大五人格对TSA的影响:一个双调节模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(10): 156-163.

JIANG Hui, WEN Guanqun, WANG Zhenxiong. Influence of big five personality on TSA of emergency rescue team: a model with dual moderating effects[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2020, 30(10): 156-163.

参考文献

[1] SALAS E, PRINCE C, BAKER D P, et al. Situation awareness in team performance: implications for measurement and training[J]. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 1995, 37(1): 123-136.
[2] ENDSLEY M R. Design and evaluation for situation awareness enhancement[C]. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society, 32^nd Annual Meeting, 1998, 32(2): 97-101.
[3] DURSO F T, GRONLUND S D. Situation awareness[M]. New York: Wiley,1999: 283-314.
[4] 王永刚, 陈道刚. 基于结构方程模型的管制员情境意识影响因素研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2013,23(7): 20-26.
WANG Yonggang, CHEN Daogang. Study on factors influencing air traffic controller's situation awarenessbased on structural equation model[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2013,23(7): 20-26.
[5] STUBBINGS L, CHABOYER W, MCMURRAY A. Nurses' use of situation awareness in decision-making: an integrative review[J]. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 2012, 68(7): 1 443-1 453.
[6] 吴初娜, 曾诚. 场景对驾驶人危险辨识能力评估结果的影响[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018,28(4): 30-35.
WU Chu'na, ZENG Cheng. Effects of scenarios on drivers' hazard perception evaluation result[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2018,28(4): 30-35.
[7] ENSLEY M R. Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems[J]. Human Factors, 1995, 37: 85-104.
[8] SAUS E, JOHNSEN B H, EID J, et al. Who benefits from simulator training: personality and heart rate variability in relation to situation awareness during navigation training[J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 2012, 28(4): 1 262-1 268.
[9] FLIN R. Selecting the right stuff: personality and high reliability occupations[M]. Washington: American Psychological Association, 2001: 253-276.
[10] STANTON N A, STEWART R, HARRIS D, et al. Distributed situation awareness in dynamic systems: theoretical development and application of an ergonomics methodology[J]. Ergonomics, 2006, 49(12/13): 1 288-1 311.
[11] SALMON P M, STANTON N A, WALKER G H, et al. What really is going on? review of situation awareness models for individuals and teams[J]. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 2008, 9(4): 297-323.
[12] 陈樊骏, 姜卉. 社会网络关系对团队情境意识影响的实验分析[J]. 数学的实践与认识, 2017, 47(22): 300-314.
CHEN Fanjun, JIANG Hui. The experimental analysis of the impact of social network on team situation awareness [J].Mathematics in Practice and Theory, 2017, 47(22): 300-314.
[13] 姜卉, 王玉婷. 应急救援团队的个体与团队情境意识: 社会网络关系的调节作用[J]. 心理科学, 2018, 41(6): 1 416-1 422.
JIANG Hui, WANG Yuting. Individual and team situation awareness of emergency rescue team: social network relationship as moderator[J]. Journal of Psychological Science, 2018, 41(6): 1 416-1 422.
[14] MA Jun, LU Jie, ZHANG Guangquan. Team situation awareness measure using semantic utility functions for supporting dynamic decision-making[J]. Soft Computing-A Fusion of Foundations, Methodologies and Applications, 2010, 14(12): 1 305-1 316.
[15] COSTA P T, MACCRAE R R. NEO-PI-R professional manual: revised NEO personality and NEO five-factor inventory (NEO-FFI).[J]. Psychological Assessment, 1992, 4: 26-42.
[16] BARRICK M R, MOUNT M K. The big five personality dimensions and job performance: a meta-analysis[J]. Personnel Psychology, 1991, 44(1): 1-26.
[17] BARRICK M R, MOUNT M K. Autonomy as a moderator of the relationships between the big five personality dimensions and job performance[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1993, 78(1): 111-118.
[18] TETT R P, JACKSON D N, ROTHSTEIN M. Personality measures as predictors of job performance: a meta‐analytic review[J]. Personnel Psychology, 1991, 44(4): 703-742.
[19] SALGADO J F. Big five personality dimensions and job performance in army and civil occupations: a European perspective[J]. Human Performance, 1998, 11(2/3): 271-288.
[20] 白新文, 王二平, 李永娟. 大五人格与绩效: 团队水平的研究[J]. 心理科学进展, 2006, 14(1): 120-125.
BAI Xinwen, WANG Erping, LI Yongjuan.Five-factor model of personality and performance: review of team-level research[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2006, 14(1): 120-125.
[21] 朱庆华, 李亮. 社会网络分析法及其在情报学中的应用[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2008, 31(2): 179-183.
ZHU Qinghua, LI Liang. Social network analysis method & its application in information science[J].Information Studies: Theory & Application, 2008, 31(2): 179-183.
[22] LIM B C. Do the leader and members make the team? the role of personality and cognitive ability[D]. Maryland:University of Maryland, 2003.
[23] BURT R S. Structural holes:the social structure of competition[M]. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press,1992: 65-67.
[24] 韩忠明, 吴杨, 谭旭升, 等. 社会网络结构洞节点度量指标比较与分析[J]. 山东大学学报:工学版,2014,45(1): 1-8.
HAN Zhongming, WU Yang, TAN Xusheng, et al. Comparison and analysis on measure indexes for structural hole nodes in social network[J]. Journal of Shandong University:Engineering Science, 2014,45(1): 1-8.
[25] ENDSLEY M R. Situation awareness global assessment technique (SAGAT)[C]. Proceedings of the IEEE 1988 National Aerospace and Electronics Conference, 1988: 789-795.
[26] MUNIZ E, STOUT R, BOWERS C, et al. A methodology for measuring team situational awareness: situational awareness linked indicators adapted to novel tasks (SALIENT)[C]. NATO Human Factors and Medicine Panel on Collaborative Crew Performance in Complex Systems, 1998: 20-24.
[27] 王孟成, 戴晓阳, 姚树桥. 中国大五人格问卷的初步编制 Ⅲ: 简式版的制定及信效度检验[J]. 中国临床心理学杂志, 2011, 19(4): 454-457.
WANG Mengcheng, DAI Xiaoyang, YAO Shuqiao. Development of the Chinese big five personality inventory (CBF-PI) Ⅲ:psychometric properties of CBF-PI Brief Version[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 2011, 19(4): 454-457.

应急救援团队中大五人格对TSA的影响:一个双调节模型

Influence of big five personality on TSA of emergency rescue team: a model with dual moderating effects

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	邝雨婕, 赵佳虹. 连续时变风险下危险品储运选址-选线问题[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(4): 185-191.
[2]	杨三军, 荆亚茹, 姜润发. 矿山救援队应急救援能力评价指标体系构建^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(8): 180-188.
[3]	成连华, 周瑞雪, 严瑾, 郭慧敏. 煤矿应急救援能力成熟度评价模型构建及应用^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(7): 180-186.
[4]	李念思, 刘小勇, 李亮, 徐坚强, 余本东. 无人机锂离子电池高低温极端环境适应性研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(8): 177-182.
[5]	宋英华, 吴昊, 刘丹, 王喆. 基于D-S证据理论的地震应急救援群决策[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(5): 163-168.
[6]	曹建, 施式亮, 鲁义, 刘勇, 王阳, 彭俊豪. 2013—2018年罐车公路运输危化品事故分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(2): 119-126.
[7]	温晓杰. 铁路行车事故救援快速反应体系研究^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(S2): 187-194.
[8]	刘文斌, 李聪旭, 魏小娟, 熊维平, 王虎. GIS技术在铁路应急救援智能决策中的应用研究^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(S2): 195-200.
[9]	李艳华, 李冉. 我国航空应急救援标准体系构建研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(8): 178-184.
[10]	胡立伟, 何越人, 佘天毅, 孟玲, 杨锦青. 高速公路应急救援中心选址优化模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(5): 145-150.
[11]	郭建华, 陈健, 金浩, 潘长城, 秦挺鑫, 王吉武. 高原高寒地区灾害现场生存保障装备体系构建[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(12): 129-136.
[12]	刘松, 邵毅明, 彭勇, 肖云鹏. 应急救援物资多式联运路径优化[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(12): 152-157.
[13]	刘玲莉, 田东东, 王子越. 私家车驾驶员驾驶行为与人格特质的关系研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(1): 13-18.
[14]	尹冰艳刘卫红. 我国高速铁路应急救援机制的完善^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(S2): 180-184.
[15]	李俊捷, 姚欣怡, 陈钉均, 倪少权. 跨区域综合交通应急救援预案评估指标选取^*[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(S2): 185-190.