使命感对航空机务维修人员安全行为的影响：有调节的中介模型

doi:10.12139/j.1672-0628.2025.05.017

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为探究使命感如何影响航空机务维修人员的安全行为，本研究对四家航空公司608名航空机务维修人员进行测量。结果显示：(1)使命感正向预测航空机务维修人员的安全行为；(2)安全氛围在使命感与航空机务维修人员安全行为之间起部分中介作用；(3)安全变革型领导力在使命感与安全氛围之间起负向调节作用。该结果对航空公司进行航空维修安全管理具有实践价值。

关键词: 使命感, 安全氛围, 安全行为, 安全变革型领导力

Abstract:

A survey of 608 aircraft maintenance technicians (AMTs) examined the relationship between sense of calling and AMTs’ safety behaviors, as well as the mechanisms involving safety climate and safety-specific transformational leadership. The results showed that: 1) sense of calling positively predicted AMTs’ safety behaviors; 2) safety climate played a partial mediating role in the relationship between sense of calling and AMTs’ safety behaviors; 3) safety-specific transformational leadership negatively moderated the relationship between sense of calling and safety climate. These results provide valuable practical guidance for airlines in managing aviation safety.

Key words: sense of calling, safety climate, safety behaviors, safety-specific transformational leadership

杨钞操, 魏巍, 白航, 刘培, 姬鸣, 游旭群. 使命感对航空机务维修人员安全行为的影响：有调节的中介模型[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2025, 23(5): 714-720.

Chaocao YANG, Wei WEI, Hang BAI, Pei LIU, Ming JI, Xuqun YOU. The Relationship Between Sense of Calling and Safety Behaviors of Aircraft Maintenance Technicians: A Moderated Mediation Model[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2025, 23(5): 714-720.

图/表 5

参考文献 0

	温忠麟, 叶宝娟. 有调节的中介模型检验方法: 竞争还是替补. 心理学报, 2014, 46 (5): 714- 726.
	张春雨, 韦嘉, 张进辅. Calling与使命: 中西文化中的心理学界定与发展. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2012, 30 (3): 72- 77.
	Aktas, E., & Kagnicioglu, C. H. Factors affecting safety behaviors of aircraft maintenance technicians: A study on Civil Aviation Industry in Turkey. Safety Science, 2023, 164, 106146. DOI
	Andel, S. A., Pindek, S., & Spector, P. E. Being called to safety: Occupational callings and safety climate in the emergency medical services. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 2016, 58 (12): 1245- 1249. DOI
	Barling, J., Loughlin, C., & Kelloway, E. K. Development and test of a model linking safety-specific transformational leadership and occupational safety. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2002, 87 (3): 488- 496. DOI
	Brandt, M., Andersen, L. L., Kines, P., & Ajslev, J. Z. N. Safety climate at work and risk of long-term sickness absence: Prospective cohort with register follow-up among 63,500 workers. Safety Science, 2023, 166, 106217. DOI
	Burns, C., & Conchie, S. Risk information source preferences in construction workers. Employee Relations, 2014, 36 (1): 70- 81.
	Chen, S. C. A dualistic model of air technician safety behavior: Application of the reformulation of attitude theory. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 2021, 41, 100632.
	Chen, S. C. Off-stage heroes: The antecedents and consequences of job passion among civil aviation maintenance crew. The International Journal of Aerospace Psychology, 2022, 32 (2–3): 95- 113.
	Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 2000, 11 (4): 227- 268. DOI
	Dik, B. J., & Duffy, R. D. Calling and vocation at work: Definitions and prospects for research and practice. The Counseling Psychologist, 2009, 37 (3): 424- 450. DOI
	Dobrow, S. R., & Tosti-Kharas, J. Calling: The development of a scale measure. Personnel Psychology, 2011, 64 (4): 1001- 1049. DOI
	Duffy, R. D., & Dik, B. J. Research on calling: What have we learned and where are we going. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 2013, 83 (3): 428- 436. DOI
	Duffy, R. D., England, J. W., Douglass, R. P., Autin, K. L., & Allan, B. A. Perceiving a calling and well-being: Motivation and access to opportunity as moderators. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 2017, 98, 127- 137. DOI
	Elangovan, A. R., Pinder, C. C., & McLean, M. Callings and organizational behavior. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 2010, 76 (3): 428- 440. DOI
	Evans, B., Glendon, A. I., & Creed, P. A. Development and initial validation of an Aviation Safety Climate Scale. Journal of Safety Research, 2007, 38 (6): 675- 682. DOI
	Grant, A. M., & Mayer, D. M. Good soldiers and good actors: Prosocial and impression management motives as interactive predictors of affiliative citizenship behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2009, 94 (4): 900- 912. DOI
	Hammond, M. M., Neff, N. L., Farr, J. L., Schwall, A. R., & Zhao, X. Y. (2011). Predictors of individual-level innovation at work: A Meta-Analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5(1), 90–105.
	Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York: The Guilford Press.
	Kelloway, E. K., Mullen, J., & Francis, L. Divergent effects of transformational and passive leadership on employee safety. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 2006, 11 (1): 76- 86. DOI
	Kharoufah, H., Murray, J., Baxter, G., & Wild, G. A review of human factors causations in commercial air transport accidents and incidents: From to 2000–2016. Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 2018, 99, 1- 13. DOI
	Liu, Y. S., Ye, L., & Guo, M. The influence of occupational calling on safety performance among train drivers: The role of work engagement and perceived organizational support. Safety Science, 2019, 120, 374- 382. DOI
	Marais, K. B., & Robichaud, M. R. Analysis of trends in aviation maintenance risk: An empirical approach. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2012, 106, 104- 118.
	Mendes, N., Vieira, J. G. V., & Mano, A. P. Risk management in aviation maintenance: A systematic literature review. Safety Science, 2022, 153, 105810. DOI
	Mohammadfam, I., Mahdinia, M., Aliabadi, M. M., & Soltanian, A. R. Effect of safety climate on safety behavior and occupational injuries: A systematic review study. Safety Science, 2022, 156, 105917. DOI
	Mullen, J. E., & Kelloway, E. K. Safety leadership: A longitudinal study of the effects of transformational leadership on safety outcomes. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 2009, 82 (2): 253- 272. DOI
	Neal, A., & Griffin, M. A. A study of the lagged relationships among safety climate, safety motivation, safety behavior, and accidents at the individual and group levels. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2006, 91 (4): 946- 953. DOI
	O’Connor, P., O’Dea, A., Kennedy, Q., & Buttrey, S. E. Measuring safety climate in aviation: A review and recommendations for the future. Safety Science, 2011, 49 (2): 128- 138. DOI
	Peng, J. X., Zhang, J. X., Zheng, L. L., Guo, H., Miao, D. M., & Fang, P. Career calling and job satisfaction in army officers: A multiple mediating model analysis. Psychological Reports, 2020, 123 (6): 2459- 2478. DOI
	Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2003, 88 (5): 879- 903. DOI
	Reis, C., Tecedeiro, M., Pellegrino, P., Paiva, T., & Marôco, J. P. Psychometric properties of the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory in a Portuguese sample of aircraft maintenance technicians. Frontiers in Psychology, 2021, 12, 725099. DOI
	Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 2000, 55 (1): 68- 78. DOI
	Syed-Yahya, S. N. N., Idris, M. A., & Noblet, A. J. The relationship between safety climate and safety performance: A review. Journal of Safety Research, 2022, 83, 105- 118. DOI
	Van den Broeck, A., Howard, J. L., Van Vaerenbergh, Y., Leroy, H., & Gagné, M. Beyond intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: A meta-analysis on self-determination theory’s multidimensional conceptualization of work motivation. Organizational Psychology Review, 2021, 11 (3): 240- 273. DOI
	Wang, T. C., & Chuang, L. H. Psychological and physiological fatigue variation and fatigue factors in aircraft line maintenance crews. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 2014, 44 (1): 107- 113. DOI
	Wu, Y. L., Xu, Q., Jiang, J., Li, Y., Ji, M., & You, X. Q. The influence of safety-specific transformational leadership on safety behavior among Chinese airline pilots: The role of harmonious safety passion and organizational identification. Safety Science, 2023, 166, 106254. DOI
	Xie, B. G., Zhou, W. X., Huang, J. L., & Xia, M. Using goal facilitation theory to explain the relationships between calling and organization-directed citizenship behavior and job satisfaction. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 2017, 100, 78- 87. DOI
	Xu, Q., Wu, Y. L., Wang, M. Y., Liu, B., Jiang, J. S., You, X. Q., & Ji, M. The relationship between sense of calling and safety behavior among airline pilots: The role of harmonious safety passion and safety climate. Safety Science, 2022, 150, 105718. DOI
	Yu, M., Qin, W. J., & Li, J. Z. The influence of psychosocial safety climate on miners’ safety behavior: A cross-level research. Safety Science, 2022, 150, 105719. DOI
	Zhang, Z., Zhang, Y., & Jia, M. Does a sense of calling facilitate sustainability? Research on the influence of calling on employee green behavior. Business Strategy and the Environment, 2021, 30 (7): 3145- 3159. DOI
	Zohar, D. Thirty years of safety climate research: Reflections and future directions. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2010, 42 (5): 1517- 1522.

变量	M±SD	1	2	3
1.使命感	64.59±12.33
2.安全氛围	74.89±8.19	0.64***
3.安全变革型领导力	42.17±4.85	0.46***	0.54***
4.安全行为	25.72±3.32	0.41***	0.54***	0.62***

变量	M±SD	1	2	3
1.使命感	64.59±12.33
2.安全氛围	74.89±8.19	0.64***
3.安全变革型领导力	42.17±4.85	0.46***	0.54***
4.安全行为	25.72±3.32	0.41***	0.54***	0.62***

预测变量	阶段一：安全行为			阶段二：安全氛围			阶段三：安全行为
预测变量	β	t	95 %CI	β	t	95 %CI	β	t	95 %CI
年龄	0.01	0.27	[−0.06, 0.08]	0.01	0.46	[−0.06, 0.06]	0.003	0.10	[−0.06, 0.07]
使命感	0.41	10.95***	[0.33, 0.48]	0.64	20.38***	[0.58, 0.70]	0.10	2.29*	[0.01, 0.19]
安全氛围							0.48	10.84***	[0.39, 0.57]
R²	0.17			0.41			0.30
F	60.04***			208.06***			80.90***

预测变量	阶段一：安全行为			阶段二：安全氛围			阶段三：安全行为
预测变量	β	t	95 %CI	β	t	95 %CI	β	t	95 %CI
年龄	0.01	0.27	[−0.06, 0.08]	0.01	0.46	[−0.06, 0.06]	0.003	0.10	[−0.06, 0.07]
使命感	0.41	10.95***	[0.33, 0.48]	0.64	20.38***	[0.58, 0.70]	0.10	2.29*	[0.01, 0.19]
安全氛围							0.48	10.84***	[0.39, 0.57]
R²	0.17			0.41			0.30
F	60.04***			208.06***			80.90***

预测变量	安全氛围			安全行为
预测变量	β	t	95 %CI	β	t	95 %CI
年龄	0.02	0.53	[−0.04, 0.07]	0.003	0.10	[−0.06, 0.07]
使命感	0.45	13.69***	[0.38, 0.51]	0.10	2.29*	[0.01, 0.19]
安全变革型领导力	0.28	8.86	[0.22, 0.35]
使命感×安全变革型领导力	−0.12	−6.99***	[−0.16, −0.09]
安全氛围				0.48	10.84***	[0.39, 0.57]
R²	0.52			0.30
F	164.97***			86.90***