No abstract

Chief operators at the Chemobyl power plant were assessed at four time points after the nuclear disaster and compared to a comparable group of chief operators at another nuclear power station. MMPI findings demonstrated a significant increase over time in health concerns, depression, and other indicators of stress in those operators working at the station at the time of the assessment. There was also an increase in the proportion with at least one MMPI clinical scale in the abnormal range. The authors hypothesize that the continuing uncertainty of the safety of working at Chemobyl may have contributed to these findings by either increasing the stress levek of those who remained at this power station, or through attracting workers who were less well adjusted before volunteering to work there.

No abstract

Purpose: Identification of the psychological preconditions of the staff stability during work at facilities after radiation accidents. Material and methods: This paper includes the comparative analysis of findings of psychological examination of the personnel of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) over the aftermath period (July 1986 – April 1987) and those of the control group consisted of the workers of the Smolensk NPP (102 persons). The psychological examination was based on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) and the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF). To achieve the purpose of this study, additional information was collected concerning the time of dismissal of previously examined employees of the Chernobyl NPP. Two groups of the surveyed workers were selected on the basis of the obtained information: – individuals who continued to work at the Chernobyl NPP after the accident until 1995 (group 1) – 74 persons; – individuals who resigned voluntary from the plant within a year and a half following the accident (group 2) – 29 persons. Results: The results of the examination using MMPI and 16-PF revealed significant differences in the generalized psychological portraits of group 1, group 2 and the control group. Individuals of the group 2 were more different in psychological parameters from the control group than those of group 1. So, according to the MMPI data, significant differences were found on the L (Lie) scale and on seven clinical scales: scale 1 (Hypochondriasis), scale 2 (Depression), scale 3 (Hysteria), scale 4 (Psychopathic Deviate), scale 6 (Paranoia), scale 7 (Psychasthenia) and scale 8 (Schizophrenia). The values in the group 2 were significantly higher than in the control group for all listed above scales. In addition, the group 2 had lower levels of 16PF factors: the Q1 (Openness to Change/Radicalism) and the secondary F4 factor (Independence). Also, a large proportion of individuals with abnormally pronounced personality traits (more than 70 T-score) were obtained in this group according to the MMPI data (41.4 %). The most frequently anomalous peaks were met on the scales 2 (Depression) and 1 (Hypochondriasis). The anomalous peaks on the MMPI profiles in the group 2 have been detected more than three times often than in the group 1. In addition, the group 2 had lower levels of 16PF factors: C (Emotional Stability) and F (Liveliness) than these factors of the group 1. Comparison of the examination results of the group 1 and the control group revealed the similarity of their generalized psychological portraits. At the same time, the group 1 demonstrated much higher values (p < 0.05) on MMPI scales: 1 (Hypochondriasis) and 2 (Depression) in comparison with the control group, however, these values were a bit higher than the general population standards (50 T-scores). Conclusion: The group of employees who quitted the job shortly after the accident was characterized by a pronounced uniqueness according to indicators of psycho-diagnostic tests, in comparison both with the control group, and with those who remained working at the plant for a long time. Apparently, these differences confirm our assumption about the existence of psychological characteristics that can be considered as preconditions for workers to make the decision to leave or continue working at the enterprise under changed conditions. This demonstrates the importance of taking into account the psychological characteristics of workers and the need for psychological support for personnel working under the exposure of harmful and hazardous factors after major radiation accidents.

Purpose: To propose a procedure for comparative analysis of correlation relationships structure between psychological scales in samples of different sizes. Material and methods: A procedure of comparative analysis of correlation relationships structure between psychological indicators in groups of different sizes based on the «zet» method of R. Fisher is proposed. To illustrate the method, data from psychodiagnostic surveys of the nuclear power plant (NPP) personnel who worked in normal conditions and the personnel of the Chernobyl NPP at four different stages of aftermath activities in 1986–1987 were used. All the subjects performed the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI); the results of each of the groups were subjected to a correlation analysis using the Pearson method. The analysis took into account average (0.5 ≤ r < 0.7) and strong (r ≥ 0.7) correlations. Results: Using the example of a number of psychodiagnostic examinations of the Chernobyl NPP personnel at various stages of aftermath activities, it is shown that the structure of correlation relationships between the MMPI scales can reflect the peculiarities of mental adaptation of professional teams working in regular and extreme conditions. It was shown that in the aftermath process by March–April 1987, the number of medium and strong pairwise Pearson correlations between the clinical MMPI scales increased. This fact apparently indicates that during this period, the NPP personnel were characterized by the simultaneous activation of various mechanisms of intrapsychic adaptation. The core of the correlation pleiad consisted of scales 1, 2, 7, and 8. Such a multidirectional reaction to the aftermath stressors was accompanied by a statistically significant increase in almost all clinical scales (except scale 6) of the average MMPI profile in comparison with the control group. The absence of stable correlations of clinical scales with the F scale indicates that the marked increase in the MMPI profile was not associated with a tendency to aggravation. By the period of November–December 1987, the hypochondria scale occupied a leading place in the correlation pleiad of the MMPI indicators of the Chernobyl NPP personnel, the number of its significant connections with other clinical scales (2, 3, 7 and 8) reached four. Apparently, the mechanism of anxiety somatization at that time could be considered as a syndrome-forming factor and taken into account when planning rehabilitation and health measures. Conclusion: The use of the proposed method of the strength standardization of pairwise correlation relationships between the MMPI scales allowed us to legitimately compare these indicators in groups that differ significantly in number. The chosen representation form of correlations facilitates the analysis of their structure.