Influence mechanism of achievement motivation on pilots' risk decision-making tendency

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.04.1486

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to explore the influence mechanism of achievement motivation on pilots' risk decision-making tendency, a hypothetical relationship model of achievement motivation-hazardous attitude-risk decision-making tendency was constructed with hazardous attitude as the mediating variable and flight experience as the moderating variable. A questionnaire survey was conducted on 188 domestic civil aviation pilots using the maturity scales, and the hypothetical model was verified by analysis of mediating and moderating effects. The results show that there is a significant positive correlation between motivation to seek success and risk decision-making tendency. The motivation to avoid failure is significantly negatively correlated with risk decision-making tendency. Hazardous attitude is significantly positively correlated with risk decision-making tendency. The motivation to seeking success is significantly positively correlated with hazardous attitude. The motivation of avoiding failure is significantly negatively correlated with hazardous attitude. Hazardous attitude plays a mediating role in the influence of achievement motivation (seeking success/avoiding failure) on risk decision-making tendency. Flight experience has a moderating effect in avoiding the influence of failure motivation on hazardous attitude. Improving the psychological quality of pilots and adjusting the level of achievement motivation and hazardous attitude of pilots in time can help pilots objectively evaluate their own ability and external environment, reduce pilots' decision-making deviation and ensure flight safety.

Key words: achievement motivation, pilots, risk decision-making tendency, influence mechanism, hazardous attitude, flight experience

WANG Yanqing, JIANG Gan, ZHOU Shiqi. Influence mechanism of achievement motivation on pilots' risk decision-making tendency[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(4): 44-51.

Figures/Tables 10

Fig.1

Tab.1

Tab.2

Tab.3

Tab.4

Tab.5

Fig.2

Tab.6

Tab.7

Fig.3

References 28

[1]	国家安全生产监督管理总局. 河南航空有限公司黑龙江伊春“8·24”特别重大飞机坠毁事故调查报告[R], 2012.
[2]	中国民用航空局. 民航局通报川航3U8633航班风挡玻璃空中爆裂事件[Z], 2018.
[3]	张宇. 时间距离和人格特征对风险决策风险倾向性的影响[D]. 昆明: 云南师范大学, 2021.
	ZHANG Yu. The influence of time distance and personality characteristics on risk propensity in risk decision making[D]. Kunming: Yunnan Normal University, 2021.
[4]	汪磊, 蒋引, 谭维. 航线飞行员风险画像指标体系构建[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(11): 13-21. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2020.11.003
	WANG Lei, JIANG Yin, TAN Wei. Study on construction of risk portrait index system for airline pilots[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2020, 30(11): 13-21. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2020.11.003
[5]	PAULEY K A, O'HARE D, MULLEN N W, et al. Implicit perceptions of risk and anxiety and pilot involvement in hazardous events[J]. Human Factors, 2008, 50(5): 723-733. pmid: 19110832
[6]	O'HARE D, SMITHERAM T. 'Pressing on'into deteriorating conditions: an application of behavioral decision theory to pilot decision making[J]. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 1995, 5(4): 351-370. doi: 10.1207/s15327108ijap0504_2
[7]	ATKINSON J W. Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior[J]. Psychological Review, 1957, 64(6): 359-372. doi: 10.1037/h0043445
[8]	陈鹏鹏. 成就动机对风险决策倾向的影响[D]. 南京: 南京师范大学, 2017.
	CHEN Pengpeng. The effect of achievement motivation on the propensity to make risky decisions[D]. Nanjing: Nanjing Normal University, 2017.
[9]	贾茹. 海军飞行人员A型行为类型、成就动机与主观幸福感的关系研究[D]. 西安: 陕西师范大学, 2015.
	JIA Ru. A research on the relationship among type a behavior pattern, achievement motivation and subjective well-being in navy flight personnel[D]. Xi'an: Shaanxi Normal University, 2015.
[10]	PAULEY K, O'HARE D, WIGGINS M. Risk tolerance and pilot involvement in hazardous events and flight into adverse weather[J]. Journal of Safety Research, 2008, 39(4): 403-411. doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2008.05.009 pmid: 18786427
[11]	孙瑞山, 赵宁, 李敬强. 民航飞行员人格特质与行为安全的理论分析[J]. 人类工效学, 2015, 21(3): 50-54,82.
	SUN Ruishan, ZHAO Ning, LI Jingqiang. A theoretical analysis of personality traits and behavioral safety in civil aviation pilots[J]. Chinese Journal of Ergonomics, 2015, 21(3): 50-54,82.
[12]	JASPERSEN J G, RAGIN M A, SYDNOR J R. Linking subjective and incentivized risk attitudes: the importance of losses[J]. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 2020, 60(2): 187-206. doi: 10.1007/s11166-020-09327-4
[13]	何贵兵. 决策任务特征对风险态度的影响[J]. 人类工效学, 1996, 2(2): 12-16,69.
	HE Guibing. The influence of decision task characteristics on risk attitudes[J]. Chinese Journal of Ergonomics, 1996, 2(2): 12-16,69.
[14]	XI Yongtao, ZHANG Qingxiao, HU Shenping, et al. The effect of social cognition and risk tolerance on marine pilots' safety behaviour[J]. Maritime Policy & Management, 2021, 48(1): 1-18.
[15]	MOLESWORTH B R C, CHANG B. Predicting pilots' risk-taking behavior through an implicit association test[J]. Human Factors, 2009, 51(6): 845-857. pmid: 20415159
[16]	HUNTER D R. Measurement of hazardous attitudes among pilots[J]. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 2005, 15(1): 23-43. doi: 10.1207/s15327108ijap1501_2
[17]	汪磊, 董传亭, 杨星月, 等. 民航飞行员风险心理与操作水平相关性研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(6): 37-42. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2019.06.007
	WANG Lei, DONG Chuanting, YANG Xingyue, et al. Correlation study of airline pilots' psychology of risk and flight operation[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2019, 29(6): 37-42. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2019.06.007
[18]	LI Yuan, LIU Zhen, LAN Jijun, et al. The influence of self-efficacy on human error in airline pilots: the mediating effect of work engagement and the moderating effect of flight experience[J]. Current Psychology, 2021, 40(1): 81-92. doi: 10.1007/s12144-018-9996-2
[19]	解旭东, 李甜田, 邱燕, 等. 听觉任务类型与飞行经验对飞行员情境意识的影响:基于眼动的证据[C]. 第二十三届全国心理学学术会议摘要集(下), 2021: 124-125.
[20]	HUNTER D R. Risk perception among general aviation pilots[J]. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 2006, 16(2): 135-144. doi: 10.1207/s15327108ijap1602_1
[21]	YOU Xuqun, JI Ming, HAN Haiyan. The effects of risk perception and flight experience on airline pilots' locus of control with regard to safety operation behaviors[J]. Accident Analysis &Prevention, 2013, 57(4): 131-139. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2013.03.036
[22]	KAHNEMAN D, TVERSKY A. Prospective theory: an analysis of decision under risk[J]. Econometrica, 1979, 47(2): 263-292. doi: 10.2307/1914185
[23]	唐辉, 卢宁. 成就动机量表简式版的研制及在深圳市初中男、女生样本间测量等值性研究[J]. 心理学进展, 2013, 3(6): 321-326.
	TANG Hui, LU Ning. Measure invariance research of the short form of achievement motive scale in boy-girl of middle school students in Shenzhen[J]. Advances in Psychology, 2013, 3(6): 321-326. doi: 10.12677/AP.2013.36048
[24]	JI Ming, YOU Xuqun, LAN Jijun, et al. The impact of risk tolerance, risk perception and hazardous attitude on safety operation among airline pilots in China[J]. Safety Science, 2011, 49(10): 1412-1420. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2011.06.007
[25]	FORNELL C, LARCKER D F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error[J]. Journal of Marketing Research, 1981, 18(1): 39-50. doi: 10.1177/002224378101800104
[26]	LAM L W. Impact of competitiveness on salespeople's commitment and performance[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2012, 65(9): 1328-1334. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.10.026
[27]	ZHAO Xinshu, LYNCH J G, CHEN Qimei. Reconsidering baron and kenny: myths and truths about mediation analysis[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2010, 37(2): 197-206. doi: 10.1086/651257
[28]	HAYES A. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis[J]. Journal of Educational Measurement, 2013, 51(3): 335-337. doi: 10.1111/jedm.12050

样本特征	分组	人数	占比/%
年龄/岁	<25	70	37.2
	[26,30]	60	31.9
	[31,35]	33	17.6
	[36,40]	15	8.0
	>40	10	5.3
学历	专科及以下	14	7.4
	本科	159	84.6
	硕士及以上	15	8.0
飞行经验/h	<6 000	170	90.4
	[6 000,12 000]	12	6.4
	>12 000	6	3.2

潜变量	测量题项代码	因子载荷	Cronbach's α	CR	AVE	潜变量	测量题项代码	因子载荷	Cronbach's α	CR	AVE
风险决策倾向	A₁	0.798	0.854	0.858	0.507	避免失败动机	F₁	0.64	0.868	0.869	0.526
	A₂	0.773					F₂	0.684
	A₃	0.769					F₃	0.754
	A₄	0.698					F₄	0.734
	A₅	0.676					F₅	0.796
	A₆	0.52					F₆	0.733
寻求成功动机	S₁	0.531	0.852	0.856	0.501	危险态度	X₁	0.692	0.791	0.799	0.401
	S₂	0.699					X₂	0.57
	S₃	0.815					X₃	0.658
	S₄	0.756					X₄	0.697
	S₅	0.663					X₅	0.53
	S₆	0.749					X₆	0.635

潜变量	均值	标准差	风险决策倾向	追求成功动机	避免失败动机	危险态度
风险决策倾向	3.011	1.015	(0.712)	—	—	—
追求成功动机	3.224	0.779	0.445	(0.708)	—	—
避免失败动机	3.142	0.811	-0.440	-0.325	(0.725)	—
危险态度	3.150	0.551	0.590	0.437	-0.464	(0.633)

拟合指标	χ²/df	SRMR	RMSEA	GFI	AGFI	IFI	CFI	TLI
参考值	<3	<0.080	<0.080	>0.800	>0.800	>0.900	>0.900	>0.900
检验值	1.586	0.061	0.056	0.856	0.824	0.924	0.922	0.913

路径	非标准化系数	标准误	检验统计量Z值	显著性系数P值	标准化系数β
寻求成功动机→危险态度	0.297	0.089	3.337	<0.001	0.321
避免失败动机→危险态度	-0.276	0.072	-3.842	<0.001	-0.359
危险态度→风险决策倾向	0.831	0.203	4.098	<0.001	0.417
寻求成功动机→风险决策倾向	0.376	0.158	2.387	0.017	0.204
避免失败动机→风险决策倾向	-0.277	0.129	-2.143	0.032	-0.181