pilot at the controls
Psychological characteristics of erroneous actions of the pilot

Psychological characteristics

erroneous actions of the pilot

The problem of pilot error is associated with one of the fundamental qualities of his as a man - freedom and thus responsibility for his actions. In terms of responsibility all the psychological views on the nature of the wrong actions are within the scope of this controversy - free or not free - and expressed, respectively, in the two positions, which can be called administrative characteristic primarily for members of the administration, management, and research, so that the characteristic first just for scientists.

Representatives of the administrative point of view believe that since a person has freedom, he is responsible for all violations in his free actions and for these violations he should be punished, i.e. All deviations in free behavior are transgressions. At the same time, as a rule, the person who made the mistake is incriminated with negligence, inattention, negligence, absent-mindedness and other such sins connected with the inadequate understanding of the person of his responsibility, that is, with inadequate manifestation of his freedom. Since mistakes are made due to the existence of freedom, the main direction of the struggle against them is the reduction of freedom of behavior.

This can be achieved in the following ways:

  • a) an increase in the number of instructions regulating the activity, and their tightening. It is assumed that the narrower the “corridor” for the occurrence of deviations and the stronger its wall, the fewer errors;

  • b) a decrease in the share of a person in the management process, the desire to reduce his role to a minimum (simple observation, algorithmized pressing of buttons, and so on.). It is considered that the less a person intervenes in the management process, the less he will make mistakes. The limit of minimizing the role of a person is full automation;

  • c) fixing the right actions, which boils down to a constant study of existing instructions, training, passing tests, etc. It is assumed that the harder a person has learned the correct behavior, the less spontaneous will be its implementation.

However, experience has shown that improper restriction of freedom itself is a source of violations of the array of instructions becomes too large, and even contradictory, alienated people from piloting at excessive automation too hard skills deprives meaningfulness of his work.

From a scientific point of view of all deviations occur in certain conditions and due to certain reasons, ie It occurs regardless of the freedom of the will and consciousness of man. In other words, the deviation is a manifestation of certain natural laws of nature, but because a person responsible for them can not be held.

Errors - not wine, but the misfortune of man.

There are eight kinds of psychological explanations for why there are deviations, and each type of explanation is based on a certain practical experience and offers a way to prevent errors.

  • 1. Under some conditions of activity, deviations occur more often than others. This means that these conditions are particularly conducive to the appearance of failures in the human psyche. Unfavorable can be a variety of factors: physical, biological, mental, social, etc. For example, the time of day, the influence of the atmosphere. The way to deal with deviations in such a case is to neutralize the action of those factors that most contribute to the occurrence of deviations.

  • 2. A perfectly healthy person under completely normal conditions commits unjustified actions. This means that the psyche, as well as the whole nature, functions according to stochastic laws, which allow ambiguity, the uncertainty of the response of any element in the system under constant external conditions. The way to deal with deviations in this case is to reduce the proportion of uncertainty in the functioning of the system, for example, by replacing more “uncertain” elements (controls, indications, alarms, etc.) with less uncertain ones, i.e. those with which less errors are made (by duplicating elements, introducing feedback, etc.).

  • 3. Deviations occur in the presence of limiting, extreme working conditions, for example, graduation of scales is very small, difficult to distinguish or toggle switches are located too close to each other. In this case, it is necessary to ensure normal conditions of activity, i.e. situation lead to the norm.

  • 4. It is only slightly complicate the situation, as a person who coped well with it, begins to admit failures, for example, in piloting when the weather conditions become more complex. This means that a person is not educated, and the way to deal with deviations in this case is to change the nature of training.

  • 5. In the same situations, some people make mistakes and others do not. It follows from this that some are able to act correctly in a similar situation, while others are not capable, i.e. some people have abilities that are appropriate for this job, while others do not. Hence the way to deal with errors: the selection of people with relevant abilities of this activity.

  • 6. In some situations, a variety of people make mistakes constantly. From this it follows that these situations do not correspond to the natural abilities of a person; he is not adapted to such kind of conditions, for example, to perform two different types of activities at the same time, such as piloting at a low altitude and simultaneously observing the ground. In this case, one should take into account the ability of a person to act in such situations and carry out training - testing the properties that a person has, so that the conditions become acceptable for him.

  • 7. In some cases, the actions of a person are destructive, destructive; destructive action can be directed at himself. This is because the instinct of destruction is present in man. In order to avoid such deviations, a person should be subjected to psychotherapeutic treatment in order to weaken the effect of instinct.

  • 8. In a situation in which a person has done everything correctly many times, it suddenly fails. This means that in this case the motivation for the success of the activity is weakened for some reason, i.e. a person is not sufficiently interested in performing such activities, and hence negligence in carrying out such activities, leading to failure. In order to avoid such deviations, a person should be properly motivated, interested in performing the task, applying positive or negative reinforcement to him.

It should be noted that the above point of view do not exclude each other, virtually any event, error, the deviation can be explained by taking any point. These qualifications are a priori, that is, the scientist has an opinion about the causes of the error before it occurs.

Thus, the administrative point of view to write off all the freedom of a person, without going into the cause of the error. In this sense, any deviation is a misdemeanor. "Scientific" point of view, denying a person the freedom interprets any deviation as a forced act. The man thus turns into an irresponsible cog ceases to be an active conscious actor.

As you can see, and in that, and in another position is permitted only one type of deviation: misconduct or involuntary action. Clearly, this is too large generalization. Consider the possible types of abnormalities in human activities.

First of all, one can speak of a person's error only if he has free will. Otherwise, his actions will be forced, for which he is not responsible. Behavior is forced, firstly, in the case when the freedom of a person is taken away and he comes under compulsion, for example, under direct order or in accordance with the letter of the instruction, although he personally may not agree with the order or consider that in this situation it is better Step back from the paragraphs of the instruction. Secondly, behavior is forced in the event that a man by his nature can not control events. For example, various kinds of illusions of perception arise irrespective of the will and will of a person who can not always use objective indicators to identify the illusory nature of his perception. In such cases, one can not also incriminate a person for responsibility for wrong actions he has committed.

But if there is free will is not any deviation is a mistake. Freedom of choice presupposes that a person has alternatives, each of which leads to a certain result. Focusing on a particular outcome, and the people make their choice, thus demonstrating the freedom of choice. In order to make responsible choices, one must understand, realize the connection with the result of their actions. Speaking psychologically, he must have the freedom of consciousness.

There are situations in which there is no possibility of understanding. This happens in two instances.

The first - when the situation is not beyond comprehension, for example, the aircraft is in a critical mode of flight, for which the unknown laws of its behavior, so the driver does not know what will or that of his action. Rational basis for the choice is not present.

Second - when the pilot loses the ability of awareness, either consciousness itself is in critical condition, as happens, for example, hypoxia, or a person loses consciousness. When a person does not have the freedom of mind, his actions are spontaneous, unregulated by himself; the outcome of the situation in this case depends on how lucky or unlucky. Responsibility for the outcome of such situations shall not pilot who has made a false move, and the one to blame for the pilot was in a similar situation (maybe he's on his own initiative was in it).

So, in the absence of freedom of will and consciousness of the action is either forced or spontaneous. Obviously, neither one nor the other can not be considered a mistake.

But if there is free will and consciousness are not any wrong action is a mistake. If the behavior is carried to a certain situation, i.e. People know what to do right and what will his wrong action, and, nevertheless, it does specifically, it is not a mistake but a crime (mischief, sabotage). For example, the co-pilot saw that the commander is wrong, but corrects him wanting to punish the commander.

Useful links: