Pilot Candidate Selection Method
Still an Effective Predictor of US Air Force Pilot Training Performance
Abstract
In 1993, the US Air Force implemented the Pilot Candidate Selection Method (PCSM) as an additional indicator of pilot training aptitude. PCSM scores have been shown to be related to several pilot training criteria including graduation/elimination, flying grades, class rank, and number of flight hours needed to complete training (Carretta & Ree, 2003). The PCSM composite is still in use today, but the scores that contribute to it have changed. The study reported here examined the predictive validity of the current composite versus several training performance measures for 883 students attending Specialized Undergraduate Pilot Training (SUPT). Results indicated that the PCSM composite remained predictive of flying training performance despite changes in test content and flying training. After correction for multivariate range restriction and dichotomization of the graduation/elimination criterion, the correlation between the PCSM composite and T-6 completion was .53. This is consistent with the value of .46 reported by Carretta and Ree (2003) for an earlier version of the PCSM composite. Its predictiveness can be attributed to the measurement of factors that have consistently shown a relation to flying performance: cognitive ability, aviation job knowledge/experience, and psychomotor ability.
References
(2009). Air force officer selection technical requirements survey (AFOTRS): Vol. 1. Analysis of quantitative results). San Antonio, TX: Chenega Global Services.
(2009). AFOQT Form S effectiveness: A summary of recent research. San Antonio, TX: Operational Technologies Corporation.
(2008). Predator pilot and sensor operator selection test batteries, RAFC Cranwell Psychological Report 00/08. Cranwell, UK: Royal Air Force College.
(2011). The NEO-PI-R as a premorbid baseline measure, AFRL-SA-WP-TR-2011-0001. Brooks City Base, TX: Air Force Research Laboratory, School of Aerospace Medicine, Aerospace Medicine Consultation Division.
(1992). Understanding the relations between selection factors and pilot training performance: Does the criterion make a difference? International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 2, 95–105.
(2000). US Air Force pilot selection and training methods. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 71, 950–956.
(2005). Development and validation of the Test of Basic Aviation Skills (TBAS), AFRL-HE-WP-TR-2005-0172. Wright-Patterson AFB, OH: Air Force Research Laboratory, Human Effectiveness Directorate, Warfighter Interface Division.
(1993). Basic Attributes Test (BAT): Psychometric equating of a computer-based test. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 3, 189–201.
(1994). Pilot candidate selection method (PCSM): Sources of validity. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 4, 103–117.
(2003). Pilot selection methods. In , Human factors in transportation: Principles and practices of aviation psychology (pp. 357–396). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
(2010). Psychological attributes critical to the performance of MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper U. S. Air Force sensor operators. AFRL-SA-BR-TR-2010-0007 Brooks City Base, TX: Air Force Research Laboratory, School of Aerospace Medicine, Aerospace Medicine Consultation Division.
(2010). Psychological profiles of USAF unmanned aerial systems Predator and Reaper pilots. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Aerospace Medical Association. Phoenix, AZ.
(1983). The cost of dichotomization. Applied Psychological Measurement, 7, 249–253.
(1989). Personality assessment in aviation selection: Past, present, and future. In , Aviation psychology (pp. 285–319). London: Gower Publishing Group.
(2010). Factor structure of the Air Force Officer Qualifying Test form S: Analysis and comparison with previous forms. Military Psychology, 22, 68–85.
(1995). Handbook of pilot selection. Brookfield, VT: Ashgate.
(1994). RANGEJ: A Pascal program to compute the multivariate correction for range restriction. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 693–695.
(2001). A comparison of U. S. Air Force pilot psychological baseline information to safety outcomes. AFSC-TR-2001-0001. Kirtland AFB, NM: Policy, Research, and Technology Division, Air Force Safety Center.
(2001). A comprehensive meta-analysis of the predictive validity of the Graduate Record Examinations: Implications for graduate student selection and performance. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 162–181.
(2004). Academic performance, career potential, creativity, and job performance: Can one construct predict them all? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 148–161.
(1943). A note on Karl Pearson’s selection formulae. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 62, (Section A, Part 1), (pp. 28–30).
(1996). Psychological measures as predictors of pilot performance: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 6, 1–20.
(1997). Pilot Candidate Selection Method (PCSM) evaluation [Issue letter]. Randolph AFB, TX: AETC Studies and Analysis Squadron.
(1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 262–274.
(1994). Personality factors affecting pilot combat performance: A preliminary investigation. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 65, A45–A48.
. (2008). Officer Training School (OTS) and enlisted commissioning programs (ECP), Air Force Instruction 36-2013. Washington, DC: Department of the Air Force.
(2000). USAF pilot selection, AFRL-HE-AZ-TP-2000-0004. Mesa, AZ: Air Force Research Laboratory, Warfighter Training Division.
(1998). Entry to USAF undergraduate flying training, AFRL-HE-AZ-TR-1998-0077. Mesa, AZ: Air Force Research Laboratory, Human Effectiveness Directorate, Warfighter Training Research Division.
