Naval Aviator Human Factors Questionnaire
Author of Tool:
O’Connor, Jones, McCauley, & Buttrey
O’Connor, P., Jones, D., McCauley, M., & Buttrey, S. (2012). An evaluation of the effectiveness of the U.S Navy’s crew resource management program. International Journal of Human Factors and Ergonomics, 1(1), 21-40.
O’Connor, P. & Jones, D. (2009 September). The crew resource management attitudes of U.S. Naval aviators. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society conference, San Antonio, TX
Primary use / Purpose:
For assessing the attitudes to the team skills required for safe and effective performance.
The civilian aviation centric Cockpit Management Attitude Questionnaire ( CMAQ; Gregorich et al., 1990) was adapted for naval aviation. It was necessary to change some of the language to ensure that it would make sense to naval aviators. A draft questionnaire was distributed to a group of 20 experienced naval aviators for comment. The comments from these aviators were used to develop the Naval Aviator Human Factors (NAHF) questionnaire. The NAHF consisted of 31 questions pertaining to five categories:
- My stress: 6 items. This scale emphasizes the consideration of- and possible compensation for- stressors in oneself (3 items dropped during factor analysis due to low reliability).
- Stress of others: 6 items. This scale emphasizes the consideration of- and possible compensation for- stressors in other team members.
- Communication: 6 items. This scale encompasses communication of intent and plans, delegation of tasks and assignment of responsibilities, and the monitoring of crew members.
- Command responsibility: 9 items. Includes the notion of appropriate leadership and its implications for the delegation of tasks and responsibilities (4 items dropped during factor analysis due to low reliability).
- Rules and order: 4 items. This subscale is concerned with adherence to rules and procedures (scale dropped due to low reliability).
Due to excessive skewness or kurtosis, and poor factor reliability, a total of nine items were discarded from the NAHF questionnaire. Three more items were discarded as part of the CFA process. Although typical of this type of questionnaire, the scales were found to have relatively low Cronbach’s