Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Utveckling av en enkät för mätning av riskperception hos soldater och officerare: Vikten av kunskap och erfarenhet för att bedöma risker
University West, Department of Social and Behavioural Studies, Psychology and organization studies.
2016 (Swedish)Independent thesis Advanced level (degree of Master (One Year)), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesisAlternative title
Development of a questionnaire for the measurement of risk perception among soldiers and officers : The importance of knowledge and experience when assessing risks (English)
Abstract [sv]

Den föreliggande studien undersöker om en omarbetad version av skalan Risk Perception Self (RPS) och Risk Perception Other (RPO) som Hunter (2002) vidareutvecklade från Imhoff och Levine (1981) för att mäta riskperception hos piloter, även mäter riskperception hos militär personal. Hunters skala bestod av (RPS=26, RPO=17) frågescenarier uppdelade i 2 perspektiv föreställande typiska risksituationer som piloter kan möta i sitt arbete. Skalan översattes till svenska och scenarierna anpassades till risksituationer av allmänmilitär karaktär som militärpersonal förstår och möter i sitt arbete. Den omarbetade skalan besvarades av 153 militärer, 20-66 år gamla, genomsnittsålder 32.5, 17% kvinnor. Deltagarnas erfarenhet av militär verksamhet varierade, Erfarna individer var soldater som hade genomgått grundläggande militär-, soldat- och befattningsutbildning (n=93). Noviser var soldater som hade nyligen påbörjat sin utbildning (n=60). Skalan hade god reliabilitet (Chronbach α för RPS=0.88, RPO=0,89) och Hunters skalas struktur kunde till stor del återfinnas i den omarbetade skalan. Den omarbetade riskperceptionsskalan användes därefter för att undersöka om studiedeltagarnas kunskap, erfarenhet, kön och ålder påverkar riskperceptionen och om den kontexten man befinner sig i när man besvarar frågorna påverkar deltagarnas riskuppfattning. Resultaten visade att Erfarna deltagare bedömer risker som mindre farliga. Kvinnor och äldre bedömer risker som farligare och personal tillhörande stridande förband bedömer risker som mindre farliga än personal vid stödjande förband. Dessa resultat är i huvudsak i linje med tidigare forskning vilket tyder på att den omarbetade skalan förmår att mäta riskperception bland militär personal. Generellt bedömde Noviser risker som farligare jämfört med Erfarna i underdimensionerna Självorsakade risker, Externa hot och Riskbenägna beslut oavsett vilken kontext de befann sig i när de fyllde i enkäten.

Abstract [en]

The present study investigated whether a revised version of the scale Risk Perception Self (RPS) and the Hazard Perception Other (RPO) that Hunter (2002) developed from Imhoff and Levine (1981) to measure the risk perception of pilots, also measures risk perception among military personnel. Hunters scale consisted of (RPS=26, RPO=17) scenarios divided in 2 perspectives depicting typical risk situations that pilots faced in their work. The scale was translated into Swedish and the scenarios adjusted to risk situations of general military nature as military personnel would understand and encounter in their work. The revised scale was answered by 153 servicemen, 20-66 years old, average age 32.5; 17% women. The participants' experience of military operations varied: Experienced individuals were soldiers who had undergone basic military training and specific military training (n = 93). Novices were soldiers who had recently started their training (n = 60). The scale had good reliability (Cronbach α = 0.88 for RPS, RPO = 0.89) and the factor-structure of Hunter’s scale replicated reasonably well in the revised scale. The revised risk perception scale was then used to investigate whether the study participants´ knowledge, experience, gender and age affected risk perception and if the respondents’ contexts affected the participants´ risk perception.

The results showed that Experienced participants assessed risks as less dangerous. Women and older people assessed risks as more dangerous, and personnel associated with combat units assessed risks as less dangerous than personnel in supporting units. These results are generally in line with previous research and suggest that the revised scale is capable of measuring the risk perception among military personnel. An interesting result was that the context in which the participants answered the questionnaire also affected risk perception. Generally, Novices assessed risks as more dangerous than experienced in self-made hazards, external threats and risk-prone decisions regardless of what context they were in when they filled in the questionnaire.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2016. , 26 p.
Keyword [en]
Psychology, safety, risk, risk perception, military, officer, soldier, questionnaire
Keyword [sv]
Psykologi, säkerhet, risk, riskperception, militär, officer, soldat, frågeformulär
National Category
Psychology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hv:diva-10671Local ID: EXM600OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hv-10671DiVA: diva2:1072598
Subject / course
Psychology
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2017-02-08 Created: 2017-02-08 Last updated: 2017-02-08Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(375 kB)30 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 375 kBChecksum SHA-512
7c2bbcf8782a98801841f6f4e9b3f557379626836a9a7d891bd0e06eab1b556979d14ed98845a03becac1e28b7ec31ce0183b3d09204058a7e8433018363f626
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
Psychology and organization studies
Psychology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 30 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Total: 202 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf