The Effect of EMU Driver Operating Time on Professional Psychological Quality

Purpose: EMU driver operation time is an important part of the locomotive crew system. To ensure the safe, efficient and accurate operation of the EMU (Electric Multiple Unit), drivers not only need to have good physical and mental health but also must be able to work under the conditions of a scientific, reasonable and humanized organization. Design/methodology/approach: To effectively analyze the actual job of an EMU driver and to avoid impacting the normal work of the drivers, we selected some of the items from the professional mentality test project, which we had found had resulted in short test times and high test reliability and validity. Findings: With a single-driver continuous value multiplied by a time of less than two hours, there were no significant differ ences; multiplied by more than 4 hours, there was a significant difference in psychological quality; specifically, the multiplied career mental quality level decreased significantly. The EMU single continuous value multiplied by driving time driver should not be more than four hours to receive the full benefit. Originality/value: Based on the different operating times, this study compared the organization of different jobs in different situations. The negative impact of psychological load on EMU driver labor intensity varied.

[1]  Torbjörn Åkerstedt,et al.  Train drivers' working conditions and their impact on safety, stress and sleepiness: a literature review, analyses of accidents and schedules , 1999 .

[2]  Monique H. W. Frings-Dresen,et al.  Psychological work characteristics, psychological workload and associated psychological and cognitive requirements of train drivers , 2014, Ergonomics.

[3]  Shayne Loft,et al.  Modeling and Predicting Mental Workload in En Route Air Traffic Control: Critical Review and Broader Implications , 2007, Hum. Factors.

[4]  D Sussman,et al.  Fatigue and alertness in the United States railroad industry - part 1: the nature of the problem , 2000 .

[5]  Joel S. Warm,et al.  Vigilance Requires Hard Mental Work and Is Stressful , 2008, Hum. Factors.

[6]  C M Pollock,et al.  The influence of sustained attention on railway accidents. , 1997, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[7]  S. Eickhoff,et al.  Sustaining attention to simple tasks: a meta-analytic review of the neural mechanisms of vigilant attention. , 2013, Psychological bulletin.

[8]  Frank Flemisch,et al.  Open a Window to the Cognitive Work Process! Pointillist Analysis of Man–Machine Interaction , 2002, Cognition, Technology & Work.

[9]  Gavriel Salvendy,et al.  Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics , 2005 .

[10]  Judith K. Sluiter,et al.  Work-related recovery opportunities: testing scale properties and validity in relation to health , 2009, International archives of occupational and environmental health.

[11]  M. A. J. Kompier,et al.  The quest for interaction: studies on combined exposure , 1990, International archives of occupational and environmental health.

[12]  R Mollard,et al.  Human vigilance in railway and long-haul flight operation. , 1993, Ergonomics.

[13]  D. Dinges,et al.  Catastrophes, sleep, and public policy: consensus report. , 1988, Sleep.

[14]  Peter A. Hancock,et al.  ADAPTIVE CONTROL OF MENTAL WORKLOAD. , 2001 .

[15]  Borna Abramović,et al.  New Graphical Approach to Railway Infrastructure Capacity Analysis , 2015 .

[16]  Pamela S. Tsang,et al.  Mental Workload and Situation Awareness , 2006 .

[17]  Peter A Hancock,et al.  State of science: mental workload in ergonomics , 2015, Ergonomics.