Identifying the Important Contributory Factors From Maintenance Error Decision Aid (MEDA) Data
Abstract
Abstract. Aviation maintenance organizations that monitor frequencies of contributory factor taxonomy codes historically struggle to identify which contributory factors are most potent. This research used Boeing’s Maintenance Error Decision Aid (MEDA) to categorize 138 aviation maintenance accident, incident, and occurrence report narratives. Analyses of contingency tables using Pearson’s chi-square, lambda, and odds ratio statistics revealed that a modest frequency of communication was highly significantly associated with leadership and supervision, individual factors, and technical knowledge contributory factors. The results demonstrate that use of these analyses goes beyond frequency and singular associative methods to identify the presence and strength of associations between contributory factors.
References
(2014). Individual-related factors and management-related factors in aviation maintenance. Procedia Engineering, 80, 293–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2014.09.088
(1988). A generalization of Cohen’s kappa agreement measure to interval measurement and multiple raters. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 48(4), 921–933. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164488484007
. (2016). Boeing Maintenance Error Decision Aid (MEDA) user’s guide. Maintenance Human Factors: Boeing Commercial Aviation Services. https://omnisms.aero/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Boeing-MEDA-Users-Guide.pdf
(2005). Fifty years of the critical incident technique: 1954–2004 and beyond. Qualitative Research, 5(4), 475–497. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794105056924
(2009). Research methods and statistics in psychology (5th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203769669
(2011). The complexity of failure: Implications of complexity theory for safety investigations. Safety Science, 49(6), 939–945. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2011.01.008
(2020). Bonferroni correction and type I error. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 114(1), 77–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X20901378
(2003).
The measurement of interrater agreement . In W. A. ShewartS. S. WilksJ. L. FleissB. LevinM. C. PaikEds., Statistical methods for rates and proportions (pp. 598–626). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/0471445428.ch18(1954). Measures of association for cross classifications. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 49, 732–764. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1954.10501231
(2001). The links between errors and error-producing conditions in aircraft maintenance. 15th FAA/CAA/Transport Canada Symposium on Human Factors in Aviation Maintenance and Inspection. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.539.6546&rep=rep1&type=pdf
(2008). Patterns of error in confidential maintenance incident reports. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 18(1), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508410701749365
(2003). Associations between errors and contributing factors in aircraft maintenance. Human Factors, 45(2), 186–201. https://doi.org/10.1518/hfes.45.2.186.27244
(2008). Routes to failure: Analysis of 41 civil aviation accidents from the Republic of China using the human factors analysis and classification system. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 40(2), 426–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2007.07.011
(2010). Preventing human errors in aviation maintenance using an on-line maintenance assistance platform. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 40(3), 356–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2010.01.001
(1998). Learning from our mistakes: A review of maintenance error investigation and analysis systems. Galaxy Scientific Corporation. https://libraryonline.erau.edu/online-full-text/human-factors-in-aviation-maintenance/other/LearningFromOurMistakes.pdf
(2003).
Shift turnover related errors in ASRS reports . In R. JensenEd., Proceedings of the Twelfth International Symposium of Aviation Psychology (pp. 918–923). https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/SHIFT-TURNOVER-RELATED-ERRORS-IN-ASRS-REPORTS-Parke-Patankar/dd08fdfc4520fbe954b286679dd25a03ea1328ff#paper-header(2003).
Identifying procedural errors in ASRS maintenance reports using MEDA and QUORUM . In R. JensenEd., Proceedings of the Twelfth International Symposium of Aviation Psychology (pp. 936–941). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/295706893_Identifying_Procedural_Errors_In_ASRS_Maintenance_Reports_Using_MEDA_And_QUORUM(2010). Human error management (Publication no. U516510) [Doctoral dissertation]. Cardiff University. https://orca.cf.ac.uk/55474/1/U516510.pdf
(2000). Development and evaluation of the maintenance error decision aid (MEDA) process. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 26(2), 261–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-8141(99)00070-0
(2006). Revisiting the Swiss cheese model of accidents. Journal of Clinical Engineering, 27, 110–115. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285486777_Revisiting_the_Swiss_Cheese_Model_of_Accidents
(1996). Qualitative descriptors of strength of association and effect size. Journal of Social Service Research, 21(4), 37–59. https://doi.org/10.1300/J079v21n04_02
(1998). Airline maintenance resource management: Improving communication. SAE International. https://www.sae.org/publications/books/content/r-192/
(2000). Analysing human error in aircraft ground damage incidents. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 26(2), 177–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-8141(99)00065-7
