The Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge names five hazardous attitudes. Each one has an antidote you say to yourself before the attitude picks the flight. Anti-authority is answered with "Follow the rules. They are usually right." Impulsivity is answered with "Not so fast. Think first." Invulnerability is answered with "It could happen to me." Macho is answered with "Taking chances is foolish." Resignation is answered with "I'm not helpless. I can make a difference."
The five pairs
Anti-authority sounds like "Don't tell me what to do," or "The rules are too restrictive; I'll do it my way." The 400-foot limit, a LAANC ceiling, or a visibility minimum feels inconvenient, so the pilot sets it aside. The antidote is to follow the rules, because they are usually right. Naming this sentence as invulnerability or impulsivity misses the pattern. Those are the other choices on the matching item, and they belong to different thoughts.
Impulsivity is the urge to do something immediately: launch now, climb now, turn now, because waiting feels worse than acting. The antidote is "Not so fast. Think first." A pilot who has not looked at the NOTAM and still punches the motors is in this pattern, even when the pilot likes the rules.
Invulnerability is "It won't happen to me." The battery that fails, the gust that drifts the aircraft over people, the link that drops, all happen to someone else. The antidote is "It could happen to me." That sentence is the wrong answer when the question asks for the macho antidote. "It could happen to me" belongs to invulnerability. Do not spend it on macho.
Macho treats risk as a chance to prove something: "I can do it. Watch this." The antidote is "Taking chances is foolish." The matching item offers that sentence next to "It could happen to me" and a shortened "Follow the rules." Only "Taking chances is foolish" is the macho antidote. Use that pair when the impulse is to press a marginal launch so the crew, or the client, can see that you can handle it.
Resignation is "What's the use?" The pilot believes the weather, the client, or the aircraft has already decided the flight, so speaking up or delaying will not matter. The antidote is "I'm not helpless. I can make a difference." A remote pilot who sees the wind rising and thinks the job is already lost, so there is no point landing, is in this pattern. Landing is the difference that person can still make.
Section 107.73 lists aeronautical decision-making and judgment as a knowledge area on the initial test and on recurrent training. The remote pilot in command is the person who has to notice the attitude, because §107.19 makes that pilot the final authority for the flight. The process that interrupts it is on the aeronautical decision-making page.
Get-there-itis is external pressure, not a sixth name
Get-there-itis is the name pilots use for external pressure. A deadline, a client on the phone, or a light that will be gone in twenty minutes can supply it. The hazard is specific: it pushes a pilot to continue into conditions they would normally avoid. It does not improve decision-making, and it does not stop at manned aircraft. A one-person drone crew can feel it because the client is often standing next to the control station.
It is not one of the five attitudes above. The five are patterns in the pilot. External pressure is a force from outside, which is why PAVE lists it separately. The IMSAFE checklist is the fitness check that belongs next to it. Fatigue and stress make the pressure harder to refuse.
A roof job with a client watching
The wind is at the top of what you briefed as a no-go, the aircraft is a light quadcopter, and the client says the photos have to leave before noon. Macho says you can handle the gusts and that backing down would look timid. The antidote is "Taking chances is foolish," and you delay. Anti-authority would sound different: the 400-foot rule feels restrictive, so you climb anyway. Impulsivity would launch before the wind check is finished. Invulnerability would say a gust has never taken this aircraft. Resignation would say the client has already decided, so delay is pointless.
If you have already launched and the client texts "just finish the last battery," the new pressure is get-there-itis. The tighter wind and the rush are conditions you would normally avoid. Landing and rescheduling is the decision the pressure is trying to talk you out of.
Matching the antidote to the attitude
The five antidotes are not interchangeable. "Taking chances is foolish" is macho. "Follow the rules. They are usually right" is anti-authority. "Not so fast. Think first" is impulsivity. "It could happen to me" is invulnerability. "I'm not helpless. I can make a difference" is resignation. A sentence can be good advice and still be the wrong antidote for the attitude in the stem.
For the "rules are too restrictive" thought, the attitude is anti-authority. For get-there-itis, the harm is continuation into conditions you would normally avoid. Recognize which sentence you are hearing before you pick the reply.
Run these pairs on the free practice test. The human-factors lessons in the course keep each attitude next to its antidote.