Browsing by Author "Lee, Seung Yong"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Exploring the effect of group polarisation on perceived invulnerability in general aviation pilots : a thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Aviation at Massey University
    (Massey University, 2008) Lee, Seung Yong
    Although both perceived invulnerability and group polarisation are well known psychological phenomena, there has not been any research conducted to examine the effect of group polarisation on the level of perceived invulnerability amongst general aviation pilots. Two studies were conducted to measure the level of perceived invulnerability amongst general aviation pilots and to test whether the level of perceived invulnerability was affected due to group polarisation. The first study tested 34 pilots. Although the majority of the pilots exhibited perceived invulnerability, there was no evidence suggesting that low level group interaction induced group polarisation leading to an increase in individual's level of perceived invulnerability. The second study examined 78 pilots. Although the majority of the participants displayed perceived invulnerability, there was no evidence suggesting that high level group interaction resulted in group polarisation leading to an increase in individual's level of perceived invulnerability. There was no evidence that the two experimental manipulations (low group interaction and high group interaction) differed in effectiveness, as the effect size between studies I and II did not significantly differ. Although it is of some concern to general aviation safety that the majority of the pilots in both studies exhibited perceived invulnerability, the level of perceived invulnerability does not appear to be increased by a group polarisation effect. The latter finding is consistent with safe operations, having found no evidence that multi-crew operations lead to increased levels of perceived invulnerability. In addition to the implication of the current findings, limitations of the present study, possible areas for further research and recommendations are presented.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Increased risk of multi-crew operations: examining the effect of group polarisation on perceived invulnerability in general aviation pilots
    (2010) Lee, Seung Yong; Gilbey, Andrew
    According to the theory of group polarisation, perceived invulnerability could be greater in multi-crew operations than for single pilots. The purpose of this study was to measure the level of perceived invulnerability among general aviation pilots in New Zealand and to examine whether the level of perceived invulnerability was influenced by the presence of other pilots. Whilst it is of some concern that the majority of the pilots exhibited perceived invulnerability, no evidence was found to suggest that the level of perceived invulnerability is affected by a group polarisation effect, although further replication of this study is recommended.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Two pilots may be safer than one: The effect of group discussion on perceived invulnerability
    (2011) Gilbey, Andrew; Lee, Seung Yong
    Although most general aviation (GA) pilots have received training in aviation decision making, one of the most common causes of GA accidents remains a pilot’s decision to press-on with a flight, when the safe decision was to turn back or divert (Federal Aviation Authority, 2002). Presumably, pilots press-on because they assume it is safe to do so, rather than because they are foolhardy. One reason pilots press-on may be because they underestimate the inherent risks. Indeed, research into the area of perceived invulnerability (PI) suggests that many pilots perceive themselves to be invulnerable to negative outcomes and that this predicts the kinds of behaviour likely to increase the chance of accident or incident (Isenberg, 1986). For more than 40 years, psychologists have been aware that decisions made by groups of people tend to polarise the views of individuals (O’Hare & Smitheram, 1995). Thus, if individuals make decisions that are risky, the decisions made in groups will tend to be more risky than those made by individuals. In aviation, this has potentially serious implications for flights where there are two pilots rather than one, because if individual pilots’ are susceptible to PI, then when there are two pilots PI may increase. Data collected earlier (Lee & Gilbey, 2010), which in a preliminary analysis found no effect of group polarisation on PI, was reanalysed to investigate whether an effect of group polarisation would be observed when both members of a pair of pilots exhibit PI. (Previously, all pilots had been included, regardless of whether they exhibited PI.) The sample were seventy-eight GA pilots, recruited from seven different flight training organisations in the North Island of New Zealand (14 female, 64 male; ages 18 to 59 years (M = 25.94, SD = 7.86) flight experience ranged from 30 minutes to 5,000 hours (Mean = 662.38 hours, SD = 895.13 hours). A within-subjects design was used, in which participants completed two equivalent measures of PI; once alone, and once in pairs, following discussion. Significant evidence of PI was found for all pilots when measured alone, t(77) = 8.54, p < 0.001 and also when measured in pairs, following discussion, t(77) = 8.92, p < 0.001. Next, unlike in our previous analysis (Lee & Gilbey, 2010), the nine pairs of participants in which one pilot did not demonstrate PI were excluded from all further analyses. (In hindsight, it was considered illogical to expect PI to be polarised following group discussion if it was not evident in individuals at the outset.) Remaining participants were allocated into two groups based upon a median split of their PI scores when measured alone (>5.8 = high PI and ≤5.8 = low PI). A 2x2 ANOVA indicated a main effect of group polarisation on PI, F(1, 58) = 5.24, p = .026 (Malone = 6.24, SD = 1.03; Mgroup = 6.01, SD = .96) and an interaction between manipulation (alone vs. group) and PI score in the control condition (low vs. high) F(1, 58) = 7.42, p = .009. Contrary to predictions, pilots with the higher levels of PI when alone showed a reduction in PI when measured in groups.The implications of the current study, suggest that perceived invulnerability in GA may be less of a problem when two (or more) pilots fly together, than when they fly alone. Future research could thus investigate accident reports to investigate whether lone pilots are more likely than two pilots to be involved in accidents or incidents where PI was a contributing factor. The findings of this study are reassuring regarding commercial flight operations, where normally there will be two pilots.