explaining 9.94 percent of the variance, with a reliability coefficient
of 0.867. Measuring items include sufficient rest, aerobic exercise,
and anaerobic exercise. The second stage of the data analysis
applied analysis of variance (ANOVA) to the resulting stressinfluence
factors, to determine their significance for the aircrew,
jet fighters, flight hours accrued, length of service, and the age of
crew members (Table 3).
A significant difference was found between pilot and non-pilot
subjects with regard to the factor of ‘Physical fitness’. The results
in Table 3 show that non-pilot subjects rated ‘Physical fitness’ as
significantly more stressful than pilot subjects did when undergoing
centrifuge training. Table 3 also indicates that ANOVA
results in the jet fighter group were prone to variation with
respect of the ‘Theory lecture’ and ‘Centrifuge equipment’ factors.
The second-generation fighter jet group rated the ‘Centrifuge
equipment’ factor as significantly more stressful than the non
second-generation group did, when undergoing centrifuge
training, but the non second-generation fighter jet group rated
the ‘Theory lecture’ factor more likely to reduce the stress than
the second-generation group did, when undergoing centrifuge
training. As for flight hours accrued, Table 3 shows that respondents
with less than 500 flight hours group rated ‘Theory lecture’
as likely to reduce stress. This was greater than for respondents
who had over 500 h when undergoing centrifuge training.
Furthermore, respondents with over 500 h generally rated the
‘Centrifuge equipment’ factor as significantly more stressful than
those with less than 500 h when undergoing centrifuge training.
Table 3 indicates that ANOVA results in the length of service
group were prone to variation with regard to the ‘Theory lecture’
and ‘Centrifuge equipment’ factors. Respondents with less than
two years of service were more likely to rate the ‘Theory lecture’
factor as likely to reduce stress than respondents with over two
years of service, when undergoing centrifuge training. Also,
respondents with more than 2-years of service generally rated the
‘Centrifuge equipment’ factor as significantly more stressful than
respondents with less than 2-years of service. As for the crews’
ages, Table 3 shows that respondents younger than 25 rated the
‘Theory lecture’ factor as likely to reduce the stress more than
respondents older than 25; and respondents older than 25 rated
‘Centrifuge equipment’ as significantly more stressful than did
respondents younger than 25 years old when undergoing
centrifuge training.
A one-way ANOVA with rank as the between-groups factor
revealed that the mean response for ‘Theory lecture’ differed
according to the rank of subjects (F7;500 ¼ 3:767, p ¼ 0.001); the
mean response for ‘Centrifuge equipment’ differed according to
the rank of subjects (F7;500 ¼ 9:923, p ¼ 0.000); the mean
response for ‘Physical fitness’ differed according to the rank of
subjects (F7;500 ¼ 2:596, p ¼ 0.012). This study further applied
Scheffé’s multiple comparison t-test to ascertain the effect of rank
on the stress-influence factors. Table 4 shows that, on average,
second lieutenants rated the ‘Theory lecture’ factor as likely to