基于平板电脑的电子评分对航空公司评估员绩效的影响

IF 1 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED
Michael C. Elsenrath
{"title":"基于平板电脑的电子评分对航空公司评估员绩效的影响","authors":"Michael C. Elsenrath","doi":"10.1080/24721840.2020.1841563","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Objective: This experimental study assessed the effects of an Apple iPad (Apple and iPad are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries) grading instrument on airline evaluator performance. Background: Extant research exploring the effects of grading formats on evaluator performance focused on pen and paper modalities. This research investigated how a contemporary iPad-based grading format affected airline evaluator performance. Method: Forty-five evaluators from a major U.S. airline graded a Boeing 767 (Boeing is a wordmark of The Boeing Company, registered in the U.S. and other countries) flight crew experiencing an engine failure during takeoff. Three grading formats were used: pen and paper, a paper-based equivalent of the iPad grading format designed to replicate the function of the iPad, and the iPad. The effects of the grading formats were measured using the following dependent variables: recorded technical criteria, recorded non-technical criteria, and correlation and inter-rater agreement with a referent score. Results: Members of the iPad paper-based equivalent and iPad groups recorded significantly more technical and non-technical criteria compared to participants using pen and paper (p < .001). Members of the iPad paper-based equivalent and iPad groups had significantly higher correlation (p = .01) and inter-rater agreement levels (p < .01) compared to participants using pen and paper. Conclusion: The results of the study failed to support the iPad as a superior grading format. Research outcomes suggested structured grading may be a more important factor in predicting airline evaluator performance than the type of grading format used.","PeriodicalId":41693,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Aerospace Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/24721840.2020.1841563","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Effects of Tablet-Based Electronic Grading on Airline Evaluator Performance\",\"authors\":\"Michael C. Elsenrath\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/24721840.2020.1841563\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Objective: This experimental study assessed the effects of an Apple iPad (Apple and iPad are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries) grading instrument on airline evaluator performance. Background: Extant research exploring the effects of grading formats on evaluator performance focused on pen and paper modalities. This research investigated how a contemporary iPad-based grading format affected airline evaluator performance. Method: Forty-five evaluators from a major U.S. airline graded a Boeing 767 (Boeing is a wordmark of The Boeing Company, registered in the U.S. and other countries) flight crew experiencing an engine failure during takeoff. Three grading formats were used: pen and paper, a paper-based equivalent of the iPad grading format designed to replicate the function of the iPad, and the iPad. The effects of the grading formats were measured using the following dependent variables: recorded technical criteria, recorded non-technical criteria, and correlation and inter-rater agreement with a referent score. Results: Members of the iPad paper-based equivalent and iPad groups recorded significantly more technical and non-technical criteria compared to participants using pen and paper (p < .001). Members of the iPad paper-based equivalent and iPad groups had significantly higher correlation (p = .01) and inter-rater agreement levels (p < .01) compared to participants using pen and paper. Conclusion: The results of the study failed to support the iPad as a superior grading format. Research outcomes suggested structured grading may be a more important factor in predicting airline evaluator performance than the type of grading format used.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41693,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Aerospace Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/24721840.2020.1841563\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Aerospace Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/24721840.2020.1841563\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Aerospace Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24721840.2020.1841563","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要目的:本实验研究评估了Apple iPad(Apple和iPad是Apple股份有限公司的商标,在美国和其他国家注册)评分工具对航空公司评估员绩效的影响。背景:关于评分形式对评估者绩效影响的现有研究主要集中在纸笔评分方式上。这项研究调查了当代基于iPad的评分格式如何影响航空公司评估员的表现。方法:来自美国一家主要航空公司的四十五名评估人员对一架波音767(波音是波音公司的一个商标,在美国和其他国家注册)机组人员在起飞时出现发动机故障进行了评分。使用了三种评分格式:笔和纸,这是一种纸质的iPad评分格式,旨在复制iPad的功能,以及iPad。评分形式的影响使用以下因变量进行测量:记录的技术标准、记录的非技术标准,以及与参考分数的相关性和评分者之间的一致性。结果:与使用笔和纸的参与者相比,iPad纸质等价物和iPad组的成员记录了更多的技术和非技术标准(p<0.001)。与使用笔或纸的参与者相比较,iPad纸质等效物和iPad小组的成员具有更高的相关性(p=0.01)和评分者之间的一致性水平(p<0.01)。结论:该研究的结果未能支持iPad作为一种优越的评分格式。研究结果表明,在预测航空公司评估员绩效方面,结构化评分可能比所使用的评分格式更重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Effects of Tablet-Based Electronic Grading on Airline Evaluator Performance
ABSTRACT Objective: This experimental study assessed the effects of an Apple iPad (Apple and iPad are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries) grading instrument on airline evaluator performance. Background: Extant research exploring the effects of grading formats on evaluator performance focused on pen and paper modalities. This research investigated how a contemporary iPad-based grading format affected airline evaluator performance. Method: Forty-five evaluators from a major U.S. airline graded a Boeing 767 (Boeing is a wordmark of The Boeing Company, registered in the U.S. and other countries) flight crew experiencing an engine failure during takeoff. Three grading formats were used: pen and paper, a paper-based equivalent of the iPad grading format designed to replicate the function of the iPad, and the iPad. The effects of the grading formats were measured using the following dependent variables: recorded technical criteria, recorded non-technical criteria, and correlation and inter-rater agreement with a referent score. Results: Members of the iPad paper-based equivalent and iPad groups recorded significantly more technical and non-technical criteria compared to participants using pen and paper (p < .001). Members of the iPad paper-based equivalent and iPad groups had significantly higher correlation (p = .01) and inter-rater agreement levels (p < .01) compared to participants using pen and paper. Conclusion: The results of the study failed to support the iPad as a superior grading format. Research outcomes suggested structured grading may be a more important factor in predicting airline evaluator performance than the type of grading format used.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信