Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS) has been used extensively to analyze accidents involved in military and civil aviation in the USA over the past several years (e.g. Shappell & Wiegmann 2001; 2003 & 2004; & Wiegmann & Shappell 1997; 2001a; 2001b; 2001c & 2003). However, with increasing world-wide use of the framework there is now a need to examine the reliability and applicability of the HFACS in different countries and cultures. Hofstede (1984) identified four different dimensions of culture, which may affect the social interactions of aircrew and impact aviation safety. This research examined the applicability of the HFACS framework for the analysis of accidents in a military, collectivist, high power-distance culture, the Republic of China (R. O. C.) Air Force. As a secondary objective, it also examined the inter-rater reliability of the 18 categories of HFACS framework. A total of 523 accidents occurring in the R.O.C. Air Force between 1978 and 2002 were analyzed. The inter-rater reliability, using. Cohen's Kappa, was between 0,440 and 0,826, which was indicative of moderate agreement to substantial agreement (Landis & Koch, 1977). Differences were observed between USA and R.O.C. at the HFACS levels of Organizational influence and unsafe super-vision. The findings of this research highlighted critical areas of human factors in R.O.C. military aviation in need of further safety initiatives, such as setting up stress management and confidential counseling programs for military pilots, improving the attitude of military pilots toward Crew Resource Management (CRM), improving the professional supervisory training for supervisors, and effective management of organizational resources for aviation operations.
|Number of pages||17|
|Journal||International Journal of Applied Aviation Studies|
|Publication status||Published - Mar 2005|
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Aerospace Engineering