A new study finds that pilots may take more risks than most people, but those risks are “calculated” and include enhanced caution while flying.
That’s the takeaway from researchers at the University of New South Wales (UNSW) in Australia, who set out to study the relationship between risk-taking and aviation.
Led by Yassmin Ebrahim from the university’s School of Aviation, the researchers administered personality tests to 117 students, some from the School of Aviation and others from the university’s general population. The personality tests included the Big 5 inventory, which assesses openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism; a risk-taking scale; and a sensation-seeking scale.
The results showed that pilots scored higher on the thrill and adventure seeking part of the scale compared to the general population.
But pilots also scored higher in self-control factors, indicating they show more self-control than members of the general population.
The pilots in the study also flew a scenario in a Frasca flight simulator, where they were told they were flying to inspect an unsealed runway in a Diamond DA-40.
According to the researchers, the pilots were not given an altitude to inspect the runway, using that number as a measure of their risk-taking.
The researchers found that pilots who were assessed by the personality tests as more imaginative, creative, having an open mind, and having high-risk tendencies remained at a higher average altitude than their less risky counterparts.
“Actual risk-taking was the opposite of that predicted by personality scales,” the researchers noted.
“It is plausible that there are two distinctly different risk-takers — impetuous and calculative risk-takers,” Ebrahim said in the study. “Impetuous risk-takers appear to engage in risky behavior with little thought or concern regarding the potential for harm. They also view hazards less holistically, thereby underestimating the probability of specific risks, and see themselves as less vulnerable to misfortune. Calculative risk-takers, on the other hand, appear to engage in risky behavior, exercising constraint, thus minimizing the potential for harm. They also have an appreciation for the hazard, its potential for harm, and possess a more realistic view of their ability.”
The researchers added that flight experience and the number of hours logged did not affect the amount of risky behavior in pilots.
According to Ebrahim, the study’s results could be used when recruiting and training pilots.
“Knowing that propensity for risk does not always result in risk-taking behavior may allow such organizations to reconsider how they use psychometric scales. By extension, a better understanding of these two factors should also allow for targeted training and education for existing pilot populations, thereby actively increasing safety.”
The study was published in the November 2022 issue of The International Journal of Aerospace Psychology.
*laughs in STOL bushplane* what is an unsealed runway?
Most people would consider me to exhibit a risk taking lifestyle.
I’m now 79 years old.
I’m a former private pilot.
I was also an active volunteer firefighter for sixty one years.
I starting riding motorcycles sixty two years ago and I still ride them.
Altogether, I’ve had one significant accident in my life, a collision with a deer on a motorcycle resulting in relatively minor injury.
Lucky? Yes, but I’m also a calculated risk taker.
I abide by the rules and refrain from taking unnecessary risks, especially while engaging in inherently dangerous activities.
My dad was a pilot, aviation instructor and also a firefighter. He taught me to evaluate the risk and benefits of decisions and act accordingly. He was known to tell his students that, “Aviation is inherently dangerous and quite unforgiving of arrogance and incompetence”.
The results of this study are consistent with my life experience.
Gotta spend that government (taxpayers) research grant money on something to make sure it keeps coming!
And I’m sure the did this research while wearing masks and not publishing anything that wasn’t PC.
“There are old pilots and bold pilots… but there are NO old bold pilots” is an aviation truism.
“There is the risk You cannot afford to take; and there is the risk You cannot afford NOT to take.” –Peter Drucker… KNOW THE DIFFERENCE!
Related…
Bill Rhodes is a philosopher who studies moral psychology. He’s also a pilot who’s leading a research study that’s turned up some striking data on why some pilots are more likely to wreck airplanes than others. It turns out what you care about may be more important than what you know or how skilled you are in the cockpit.
https://www.avweb.com/multimedia/podcast/what-you-care-about-may-predict-if-youll-crash/
Related…
https://www.faa.gov/regulationspolicies/handbooksmanuals/risk-management-handbook-faa-h-8083-2a
Actually there are thousands of “old bold pilots” ……. you just don’t know them.
Intellectual Mumbo jumbo
New study….. repeating age old common knowledge information, or, reinventing the wheel. Seeing a lot of that these days.
Yep; must’ve been a slow year down in New South Wales… I guess somebody else had already done a study that proved the earth is round.
Wait, wait . . . I have the opinions of several politicians, multiple professional athletes and hundreds of internet bloggers who “have done their own research” and they ALL agree and say it is FLAT.
It must be flat. Politicians would never lie to us, professional athletes are intellectual role models, and remember that Winston Churchill said that if you read it on the internet, it must be true.
NASA has the unmitigated gall to sell a lapel pin which says “Not flat – we checked. NASA”. Who the heck are they, anyway, just one voice in the fair and balanced debate where both sides have to be heard in the interest of fairness.
I know – I’ll ask Alexa! Or maybe Wikipedia!