AircrewHealth.comSurvey participants, as well as other researchers, may be interested to know something about the measures used in both versions of the Aircrew Stress Study and the Aviation Ground Crew Stress Study.
Most of the items are identical across all versions of the survey questionnaires, including the demographic items, and the sections that collect health and wellness information about the participants.
Among the items that are the same across all versions of the questionnaire are standard measures used in many kinds of stress research. Use of such measures allows us to compare our results with those from similar studies with other occupational groups.
Each version of the questionnaire has a unique set of items that are job-specific. All Pilots who take the survey are presented with a set of items related to stressful events that may happen while working on the flight deck. All Flight Attendants are presented with a set of items related to stressful things that may occur while working in the aircraft cabin. All Ground Crew respond to a set of items related to the stressful aspects of their non-flying jobs.
As well, all three versions of the questionnaire include an array of items having to do with stressful events and situations common to all jobs in the aviation industry.
The unique sets of job-specific items in the stress studies were developed especially for this research project.
At the outset of this research project, a number of currently employed commercial Pilots and Flight Attendants were interviewed about the nature of their jobs, and what they perceived to be stressful. The information from those interviews was used to generate the job-specific questionnaire items.
Next, the questionnaires were administered to 100 Pilots and Flight Attendants, as a field-test. Those in the field-test sample were asked to complete the questionnaire items, and also to provide feedback about the content. They were asked to evaluate the appropriateness of the items, in light of the realities of their jobs. They also were asked to suggest additional items to address any important topic we might have overlooked.
Comments and other feedback from the field-test participants were used to refine the questionnaire, which was then automated and put on-line as the Aircrew Stress Study.
Shortly after the original Aircrew Stress Study was launched, several Pilots and Flight Attendants who worked for Corporate and other GA operators (e.g., under FAR Part 91 and FAR Part 135) contacted the lead researcher to say that the job-specific items on the survey questionnaire did not adequately reflect the kind of flying they did, and the conditions under which they worked.
A new set of items was developed to address the specifics of corporate flying. These items were based on a series of interviews and correspondence with corporate crew members. This second version of the questionnaire was launched early in 2004 as the Corporate Aircrew Stress Study.
A third version of the stress study questionnaire was similarly developed. This third version, launched in mid-2004, has come to be known as the Aviation Ground Crew Stress Study. Its job-specific items address the situations of those who work in the aviation industry in non-flying jobs.
The stresses in people's lives and how they respond to them can have an impact on mental and physical health.
Some common near term effects include anxious feelings, depressive symptoms, and disturbed sleep. Negative effects on physical health also are possible. Exposure to chronic stress can suppress immune function and make the individual more susceptible to illness. In our stress study questionnaires, we use the Duke Health Profile to measure these effects.
Many things can mediate or "buffer" these effects. One such mediator is social support. By social support we mean the availability of outside resources that a person can call on when in need of help or support. Social support includes knowing that you have someone to talk to about problems, material aid such as someone to lend you money if you really need it, and just having companions to do things with. The Duke Social Support and Social Stress Scale (DUSOCS) is included in the survey to address these issues.
Frequent or chronic stress can lead to levels of anxiety and depression great enough to interfere with the individual's sense of well-being. We use a measure called the WHO-5 to measure sense of well-being.
An individual difference that is important for handling stress is a person's sense of control over events. People who believe that events happen mostly by chance or luck tend to feel more negative effects from stressful events. In contrast, people who believe that they can influence the outcome of a challenge by active problem solving usually do indeed cope better with stressful events. Our measure for this variable is the Mirowsky-Ross Sense of Control Scale.
A related concept is called "self-efficacy.". This term refers to people's degree of confidence that their own capabilities can produce desired effects. People with a high sense of self-efficacy are generally good copers and resilient in the face of stress, while people low on this attribute tend to feel more helpless in the face of challenge. Our stress studies measure this construct using the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE).
(Copyright © 1989-2001 by Dept. of Community & Family Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA)
This scale was developed by a team at Duke University Medical Center and is used in this study by permission. It yields an overall General Health score and a Mental Health score. In addition, certain combinations of items are scored such that they yield scores for Anxiety, Depression, Pain, Disability, and Self Esteem.
(Copyright © 1986-2001 by Dept. of Community & Family Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA)
This instrument also was developed at Duke University Medical Center and was used in the present study by permission. It measures amount of perceived support from family and non-family sources, and personal stress from relations with family and non-family individuals and groups.
A multinational group of scientists working on behalf of the World Health Organization created this measure as part of a larger worldwide research project to study subjective quality of life. It has been used in dozens of countries and has been translated into many languages. It measures positive mood, vitality, and other indicators of overall well-being.
This eight-item instrument measures perceived control in terms of both positive and negative outcomes. Previous studies have found that many people tend to take credit for their successes, but fewer take responsibility for their failures as opposed to attributing them to bad luck.
Health psychologist Dr. Ralf Schwarzer and his colleagues at the University of Berlin created this measure. Originally developed in the German language, it has since been translated into 27 languages, including the English version used in the present study. It is known to be a highly reliable measure and is used cross-culturally to assess coping resources of the individual.
