The main task of our research was identification of personal characteristics of anesthesiologists who choose subjective or objective criteria while decision making in a potentially dangerous situation. Extubation was taken as a model for such a situation, which is often a critical emergency, when so-called non-technical skills of the anesthesiologist, i.e. personality traits, are of particular importance. Material and methods. The sample of the study conducted in January—March 2018, included 38 anesthesiologists. The following methods were used: a questionnaire identifying the dominant criteria in decision making; associative experiment; V.M. Rusalov’semotionality test; EPI personality inventory; MBI burnout inventory; Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire (MDMQ); locus of control scale; viability test; symptomatic general state questionnaire (stress tolerance); and intolerance of uncertainty scale. Results. Psychosemantic analysis of the concept of a «potentially dangerous situation in healthcare» showed a predominantly negative connotation. In general, anesthetists tend to take responsibility (the dominance of «subjective» descriptors) in a potentially dangerous situation in medical care. The analysis of the level of emotional stability (EPI) demonstrated a two-fold prevalence of physicians with emotional stability (65% emotionally stable and 35% emotionally unstable in the «subjective group», 66 and 34% in the «objective group», respectively). Most anesthetists presented an average and high level of emotional burnout syndrome (77% in the «subjective» group, 83% in the «objective» group). Vigilance is the dominant trait of all anesthesiologists of the sample. Conclusion. The following traits were typical for most anesthesiologists who participated in our study: emotional stability, high and normal level of viability, high level of stress tolerance, medium and high level of emotional burnout syndrome.