Aviation Safety Locus of Control Scale

Abstract

The Aviation Safety Locus of Control scale (ASLOC) is a specialized Psychometric Scales instrument designed to measure an individual’s perception of control over safety outcomes within the operational domain of aviation. It assesses whether aviators attribute the causes of accidents, incidents, and injuries primarily to their own actions and behaviors (Internal Locus of Control) or to external factors such as luck, fate, equipment failure, or poor organizational oversight (External Locus of Control). The scale is crucial for understanding safety culture and predicting risk-taking behavior among flight personnel.

Keywords

Aviation Safety, Locus of Control, Pilots, Internal Control, External Control, Safety Culture, Accident Prevention, Psychometrics, Human Factors.

Authors

D. R. Hunter (2002), based on foundational work by Jones JW & Wuebker L. (1985).

Purpose

The primary purpose of the ASLOC scale is to quantify the degree to which aviation professionals, particularly pilots, believe they can personally influence and control safety outcomes in their working environment. By differentiating between internal and external attributions of responsibility, the scale helps safety managers and researchers identify individuals or groups who may be prone to accepting unnecessary risks or who feel powerless against organizational or environmental hazards. This diagnostic capability is essential for targeted safety training and intervention programs aimed at improving Aviation Safety performance.

Understanding an individual’s locus of control is critical in high-reliability organizations like aviation, as it directly impacts decision-making, adherence to checklists and regulations, and reporting of hazards. The instrument provides a standardized metric for evaluating these deeply held beliefs regarding accountability and control over potentially catastrophic events.

Construct

The ASLOC scale operationalizes the psychological construct of Locus of Control, as originally developed by Julian Rotter, but specifically tailored to the context of aviation safety. It measures two primary factors:

• Internal Locus of Control: Reflects the belief that safety outcomes—such as avoiding accidents or incidents—are a direct result of the pilot’s own skills, carefulness, adherence to procedures, and effort. Individuals scoring high on this factor generally take greater personal responsibility for safety.
• External Locus of Control: Reflects the belief that safety outcomes are determined by forces outside of the pilot’s personal influence, such as luck, fate, unpredictable environmental conditions, faulty equipment, or systemic failures (e.g., poor FAA oversight or inadequate regulations).

The scale is designed to assess the balance between these two attributional styles regarding accident causality within the cockpit and flight operations environment.

Validity

The validity of the Aviation Safety Locus of Control scale was established through its development process, which ensured that items clearly differentiate between internal and external attributions relevant to the aviation context. While specific details of convergent and discriminant validity coefficients are not provided in the summary data, the original Hunter (2002) development study focused on establishing construct validity by demonstrating that the two subscales (Internal and External) measure distinct, yet related, dimensions of safety belief, consistent with established locus of control theory. Furthermore, the instrument’s utility has been demonstrated in subsequent research, such as studies focusing on Indian aviators, reinforcing its cross-cultural applicability and predictive power regarding safety behavior.

Reliability

Internal consistency reliability was assessed using Coefficient Alpha on a sample of 477 cases. The results indicate acceptable, though modest, reliability for both subscales:

• Coefficient Alpha for the 10-item Internal subscale was 0.69.
• Coefficient Alpha for the 10-item External subscale was 0.63.

These values suggest that the items within each subscale are reasonably correlated and measure a cohesive construct. While reliability values above 0.70 are often preferred in psychological research, the reported figures (0.69 and 0.63) are frequently deemed acceptable for instruments used in preliminary research and specialized occupational settings, particularly given the specific nature of the Aviation Safety construct.

Factor Analysis

The structure of the ASLOC scale is inherently based on a two-factor model, reflecting the core components of the Locus of Control theory. Although the specific results of the factor analysis (e.g., eigenvalues, factor loadings) are not provided in the summary, the development process required statistical confirmation—likely via Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) or Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)—to verify that the items load onto two distinct, orthogonal factors corresponding to the Internal and External subscales. This statistical confirmation ensures that the scale effectively separates beliefs about personal control from beliefs about external determination regarding aviation incidents.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report questionnaire / Psychometric Scale

Format: 5-point Likert scale, ranging from Strongly Agree (5) to Strongly Disagree (1).

Language Available: Primarily English (Original development) and utilized in other contexts (e.g., Indian aviators).

Population Group: Aviation professionals (e.g., Pilots, Aviators, Flight Crew).

Age Group: Adult (Professionals).

Population Details: The initial reliability sample included 477 cases, likely drawn from civil or military aviation personnel.

Test Methodology: Respondents rate their level of agreement or disagreement with 20 statements concerning the causes and preventability of aviation accidents and incidents. The scale is scored by summing items for the Internal and External subscales.
The instrument is available for research purposes at: http://www.avhf.com/html/Researcher/ASLOC_Civil.asp

Scoring Key Structure

The scale consists of 20 items (as listed below), which are divided into two 10-item subscales for scoring. The scoring key provided in the source material indicates the following item assignments (referencing a potentially longer version, but defining the factor structure):

• Internal Subscale Items: q1, q3, q4, q6, q10, q13, q14, q18, q21, q23 (These items reflect personal responsibility and control).
• External Subscale Items: q2, q5, q7, q12, q15, q17, q19, q20, q22, q24 (These items reflect fate, luck, or external systems/equipment).

Note: Since only 20 items are explicitly listed below, the full scoring key may pertain to a 24-item version, but the principle remains that higher scores on the Internal subscale indicate a stronger belief in personal control, while higher scores on the External subscale indicate a greater attribution of outcomes to outside forces.

Keywords

Pilot Behavior, Safety Management Systems, Human Factors, Crew Resource Management, Attribution Theory, Aviation Psychology, Locus of Control, FAA Oversight.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: N/A (Not provided in source material)

Affiliation Email addresses: N/A (Not provided in source material)

Correspondence Address: N/A (Not provided in source material)

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The development of the Aviation Safety Locus of Control scale was documented in 2002 by D. R. Hunter. The instrument appears to be available for non-commercial research purposes via the provided link. Users should consult the author or the source website for specific permissions required for commercial application or large-scale organizational use. No fee information is explicitly provided in the source material.

Reference’s

• Hunter‚ D. R. (2002). Development of an aviation safety locus of control scale. Aviation‚ Space‚ and Environmental Medicine‚ 73‚ 1184-1188.
• Joseph‚ C.‚ & Ganesh‚ A. (2006). Aviation safety locus of control in Indian aviators. Indian Journal of Aerospace Medicine‚ 50‚ 14-21.
• Jones JW‚ & Wuebker L. (1985). Development and validation of the safety locus of control scale. Perceptual and Motor Skills‚ 61‚151–161.

Items of the Aviation Safety Locus of Control scale

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

1. If pilots follow all the rules and regulations‚ they can avoid many aviation accidents.
2. Accidents are usually caused by unsafe equipment and poor safety regulations.
3. Pilots should lose their license if they periodically neglect to use safety devices (for example‚ seat belts‚ checklists‚ etc.) that are required by regulation.
4. I Accidents and injuries occur because pilots do not take enough interest in safety.
5. Avoiding accidents is a matter of luck.
6. Most accidents and incidents can be avoided if pilots use proper procedures.
7. Most accidents and injuries cannot be avoided.
8. Most accidents are due to pilot carelessness.
9. Most pilots will be involved in accidents or incidents which result in aircraft damage or personal injury.
10. Pilots should be fined if they have an accident or incident while “horsing around”.
11. Most accidents that result in injuries are largely preventable.
12. Pilots can do very little to avoid minor incidents while working.
13. Whether people get injured or not is a matter of fate‚ chance‚ or luck.
14. Pilots’ accidents and injuries result from the mistakes they make.
15. Most accidents can be blamed on poor FAA oversight.
16. Most injuries are caused by accidental happenings outside people’s control.
17. People can avoid getting injured if they are careful and aware of potential dangers.
18. It is more important to complete a flight than to follow a safety precaution that costs more time.
19. There is a direct connection between how careful pilots are and the number of accidents they have.
20. Most accidents are unavoidable.