1. Atroshenko Yu.K. Avtomatizirovannye sistemy upravleniya AES: uchebnoe posobie / Pod red. Yu.K. Atroshenko, E.V. Ivanova. Tomsk: Izd-vo Tomskogo politehnicheskogo universiteta. 2014. 81 c.
2. Duel' M.A., Kanyuk M.I. Avtomatizaciya tehnologicheskih processov i ee vliyanie na effektivnost' energoproizvodstva TES i AES // Vostochno-Evropeyskiy zhurnal peredovyh tehnologiy. 2011. T.5/8, № 53. S. 15-22
3. Kosenkov A.A. Psihologicheskie faktory professional'noy uspeshnosti operatorov blochnyh schitov upravleniya atomnyh elektrostanciy // Saratovskiy nauchno-medicinskiy zhurnal. 2014. T. 10, № 4. S. 758-761. https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=23597895.
4. Cattell RB. Intelligence: Its structure, growth and action. New York. Elsevier. 1987.
5. Plomin R, von Stumm S. The new genetics of intelligence // Nature Reviews Genetics. 2018. Vol 19, No 3. P. 148-159. DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1038/nrg.2017.104
6. Eysenck HJ. Personality, genetics and behavior: Selected papers. New York. Praeger. 1982.
7. Freydzher R, Feydimen D. Lichnost': teorii, eksperimenty, uprazhneniya. SPb.: Praym-Evroznak, 2004. 608 c.
8. Bodrov V.A. Psihologiya professional'noy deyatel'nosti. Teoreticheskie i prikladnye problemy. M.: Institut psihologii RAN. 2006. 623 c.
9. Cattell RB, Horn JL. A check on the theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence with description of new subtest designs // Journal of Educational Measurement. 1978. Vol. 15, No 3. P. 139-164. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1745-3984.1978.tb00065.x.
10. Tews MJ, Michel JW, Lyons BD. Beyond personality: the impact of GMA on performance for entry-level service employees" // Journal of Service Management. 2010. Vol. 21, No 3. P. 344-362. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/09564231011050797.
11. Stasielowicz L. How important is cognitive ability when adapting to changes? A meta-analysis of the performance adaptation literature // Personality and Individual Differences. 2020. Vol. 166, No 1. 110178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110178.
12. Mishkevich A.M. Ekstraversiya v raznyh teoriyah lichnosti //Penzenskiy psihologicheskiy vestnik. 2019. T. 1, № 12. S. 52-69.
13. Blickle G, Meurs JA, Wihler A, Ewen C, Merkl R, Missfeld T, Extraversion and job performance: How context relevance and bandwidth specificity create a non-linear, positive, and asymptotic relationship // Journal of Vocational Behavior. 2015. No 87. P. 80-88, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2014.12.009.
14. Grant AM, Schwartz B.Too much of a good thing: The challenge and opportunity of the inverted U. Perspectives on Psychological Science. 2011. No 6. P. 61-76.
15. Pierce JR, Aguinis H. The too-much-of-a-good-thing effect in management // Journal of Management. 2013. No 39. P. 313-338. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311410060.
16. Kumar D, Kapila A. Problem solving as a function of extraversion and masculinity // Personality and Individual Differences. 1987. Vol. 8, No 1. P. 129-132. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(87)90020-1.



