管制员疲劳状态下认知能力差异分析  

Difference analysis of the cognitive capacity of controllers under fatigue

作　　者：王洁宁[1,2] 侯小庆 贾奇 WANG Jie-ning;HOU Xiao-qing;JIA Qi(College of Air Traffic Management,Civil Aviation University of China,Tianjin 300300,China;Tianjin Key Laboratory of Operation Programming and Safety Technology of Air Traffic Management,Civil Aviation University of China,Tianjin 300300,China;East China Air Traffic Management Bureau,Civil Aviation Administration of China,Shanghai 200335,China)

机构地区：[1]中国民航大学空中交通管理学院,天津300300 [2]中国民航大学天津市空管运行规划与安全技术重点实验室,天津300300 [3]民航华东地区空管局,上海200335

出　　处：《安全与环境学报》2021年第6期2652-2659,共8页Journal of Safety and Environment

基　　金：国家重点研发计划项目(2016YFB0502401);民航华东空管局科技项目(KJ1804)。

摘　　要：为监测不同岗位管制员执勤过程中的疲劳状态,利用精神运动能力检测结合空间知觉感知测试仪设计试验方案,研究不同岗位管制员疲劳状态下的认知能力差异。结合试验获取的数据,运用K-means方法将管制员工作状态划分为清醒和疲劳。选取疲劳数据,通过KW检验理论计算并分析不同岗位间管制员疲劳状态下认知能力差异。结果表明:进近与区域管制员疲劳状态下警觉性差异度为75.495,即进近与区域管制员疲劳状态下管制员警觉性存在显著差异;进近与塔台管制员疲劳状态下注意力稳定性差异度为7.881,不存在显著差异。To monitor the fatigue status of controllers in different positions during working,a test platform was built combining the psychomotor vigilant test(PVT),the spatial perception tester,and NASA-TLX(Task Load Index) scale.During working,controllers not only should do the PVT Test and spatial perception test but also complete the NASA-TLX scale according to their fatigue state before and after duty.The experimental data was collected and analyzed by the Pearson correlation coefficient method.The three variables of PVT response time mean,PVT response time variance,and spatial perceptual perception test response time mean were significantly correlated with the test results of the NASA-TLX scale,and thus they were selected as the variables to monitor controller fatigue state.Combining with the data obtained from the test,controllers’ working status was classified as sobriety and fatigue by the K-means method.After selecting the fatigue data,the cognitive capability differences of controllers in different positions were calculated and analyzed by Kruskal Wallis(KW) test theory.The results show that under fatigue the difference of alertness between approach controllers and area controllers is 75.495 which is a significant difference;the difference of attention stability between tower controllers and approach controllers under fatigue is 56.755 which is a great difference;the difference of memory between tower controllers and approach controllers under fatigue is 61.624 that which is a great difference;the difference of alertness between approach controllers and area controllers is 7.881 which is a significant difference.The model and experiment method proposed in this study provide a new reference for controller selection and fatigue surveillance in different positions.

关 键 词：安全管理工程 管制员 疲劳 认知能力 聚类分析 差异分析 

分 类 号：X910[环境科学与工程—安全科学]