Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

SAGETRACK

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Merriti, A. C.
Right arrow Articles by Helmreich, R. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Human Factors on the Flight Deck

The Influence of National Culture

Ashleigh C. Merriti

The University of Texas at Austin

Robert L. Helmreich

The University of Texas at Austin, nasaut{at}mail.utexas.edu

Pilots from the United States, the Philippines, and Taiwan as well as flight attendants from the United States, Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, Thailand, Singapore, and Taiwan completed a 20-item attitudinal questionnaire about group processes on the flight deck. A three-dimensional INDSCAL analysis revealed one dimension, used primarily by the eight Asian groups, which reflected high power distance and collectivism. The second dimension, reflecting individualism and moderate power distance, was used by the U.S. flight attendants. The third dimension, individualism and low power distance, was used almost exclusively by the U.S. pilots. The attitudinal similarity among the eight Asian groups was attributed in part to the questionnaire's monocultural bias. A new study is outlined, and training recommendations are offered.

Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Vol. 27, No. 1, 5-24 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/0022022196271001


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of ManagementHome page
A. S. Tsui, S. S. Nifadkar, and Amy Yi Ou
Cross-National, Cross-Cultural Organizational Behavior Research: Advances, Gaps, and Recommendations
Journal of Management, June 1, 2007; 33(3): 426 - 478.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
International Journal of Cross Cultural ManagementHome page
X. Huang and E. Van de Vliert
Job Formalization and Cultural Individualism as Barriers to Trust in Management
International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, August 1, 2006; 6(2): 221 - 242.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Organizational Research MethodsHome page
B. S. Schaffer and C. M. Riordan
A Review of Cross-Cultural Methodologies for Organizational Research: A Best- Practices Approach
Organizational Research Methods, April 1, 2003; 6(2): 169 - 215.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Advances in Developing Human ResourcesHome page
A. Sauquet and E. Bonet
Implications of National Cultural Impacts for Conflict Resolution and Team Learning in Spain: Observations From a Comparative Case Study
Advances in Developing Human Resources, February 1, 2003; 5(1): 41 - 63.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Cross-Cultural PsychologyHome page
A. Merritt
Culture in the Cockpit: Do Hofstede's Dimensions Replicate?
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, May 1, 2000; 31(3): 283 - 301.
[Abstract] [PDF]