3Ol—(l)3l4, Adv. Space Res. Vol. 12,No. lpp.(l) Printed in GreatBritain. All rights reserved. 1992 02734177/92$15.OO Copyright @ 1991 COSPAR AN AYFEMPT TO DETERMINE THE IDEAL PSYCHOLOGICAL PROFILES FOR CREWS OF LONG TERM SPACE MISSIONS H. Ursin,* B. Comet** and C. Sou1ez~Larivière*** *Universi~yof Bergen, Bergen, Norway ** CNES, Toulouse, France ~ ESA/ESTEC, Noordw~jk,The Netherlands Psychological issues are probably the most crucial questions for a successful manned Mars Mission. There are no data related to confinement of an international crew of 5 or 6 subjects for a period ranging from 1½ to 2½ years. This is required to predict the succcess of such a challenge. This paper reviews possible psychological criteria for selection at individual level (personality, psychological stability, competence, social skills) as well as at crew level (crew size, gender, compatability, group homeostasis). Once astronauts have been selected an important effort will have to be made pre-flight to prepare the crew to the autonomy necessary for a Mars trip. During the mission psychological support will be important, but probably limited by the mission constraints. At this stage, mission success will probably rely mainly on the capacity of the crew to prevent and manage crises internally. Post-flight psychological support is necessary to help astronauts to readapt to a normal way of life on Earth. Psychological criteria at individual level include strong adaptability, resistance to psychological stressors, psychological stability, and social skills. These abilities must be combined with a “high profile” of professional experience, knowledge and wisdom. The social organization of the crew should not be based on a military approach, but more on a democratic team organization of the group. This raises special challenges for the role of the group leader, which remains essential. Psychological tests will be used to assess these criteria, and a goal directed training must be provided for the astronauts. It appears that “select out~probably is easier than to establish ideal psychological profiles. Crew selection will be performed by taking into account group dynamics, personal preferences, and compatability between astronauts. The alternative crew selections should be validated by simulation studies including long term confinement. Experience from other confined groups should be considered. It may be necessary to test the selection by training the astronauts to a stage where they will become able to live together for a long time. Preliminary remark This paper is based exclusively on a bibliographical review and is not a clinical or experimental work. Recommendations and opinions expressed here by the authors are meant to reflect the state of the art and contemporary discussions as presently found in the literature, and represent the personal views of the authors, not that of the Agency. 1. FORESEEABLE CONSTRAINTS OF A MARS-TYPE MISSION (7, 9, 10, 50, 51) The background for the following discussion is the constraints for Mars-type missions, this is the basis for the psychological stressors which are foreseeable. Once these boundaries have been defined it is possible to state what the crew is supposed to withstand, and to ~ ~ ~ ~A ~ ~ H. Ursm et aL (1)302 The transit of the crew via the Space Station in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) seems to be a necessary step. The Mars spaceship will be integrated in LEO before its journey to Mars. Once the transit between LEO and LMO (Low Mars Orbit) will be completed the crew will be split in 2 groups: Some astronauts will remain on board the mother spacecraft whilst the others visit the Mars surface. Afterwards, all astronauts will reconvene in LMO before travelling back to Earth. This will be done again via the LEO Space Station, where appropriate care and quarantine will be provided. Finally, a spacecraft will bring the crew back to Earth. 1.2 Mission Duration Table 1.2-I: Mars Piloted Mission: Duration (in months) Mission type Earth-Mars Transit Mars Surface Episode Mars-Earth Transit Total Duration Coirmients Mars Fly-by (opposition class)* - - - 12 (1) Sprint (opposition cl ass)* 8 1 6 15 (1) Intermediate (opposition class)* 12 2 8 22 (2) Long (conjunction cl ass) 9 16 7 32 (3) * Opposition means that Mars and Earth are lined up on the same side of the San. ** Conjunction means that the sun Is between Earth and Mars. (1) Mars Fly-by & SDrint mission These missions require high energy transfer trajectories. There is no or a short (1 month) stay on Mars. The total duration of the trip is slightly more than 1 year. In the case of a split mission scenario, an unmanned cargo is assembled at the space station and Independently sent to Mars. A manned spaceship will then be assembled and sent to make the cargo vehicle using a fast trajectory. (2) O~~osition Class tra.iectories with Venus Swing-by Energy requirement is reduced by using Venus Swing-by on either the outbound or the inbound leg. Stay on Mars is about 2 months. The total duration of the mission is about 2 years. The Venus swing-by could produce a psychologically important monotony break for the crew. This mission scenario is supported by astronauts S. Ride and M. Collins. (7,51) (3) Con.iuction class tra.iectories These missions require low energy transfer trajectories. But the pay-off is a longer duration of the mission (about 2.5 years) with a stay on Mars of 16 months! In each case, total duration of the mission will have to be traded off with the mass of fuel needed to carry out the mission. It is likely that the shortest mission (Mars fly-by i.e. 12 months) will be chosen as the first exploratory Mars mission. However, in this paper we shall consider a duration from 1.5 to 2.5 year of confinement as the criteria for identification and selection of candidates able to cope with a Mars trip. 1.3 Crew size Most of the literature consider a total crew of 4 to 6 astronauts. Table 1.3-1: Crew size * Total crew Landing crew LMO crew 4 2 2 Coii.ients 5 3 2 One gender crew recolmeended* 6 4 2 Minimum number to observe groups dynamics An odd number has been reconmiended for r’aching decisions within the crew if a decision Ideal Psychological Profiles for Crews of Space Missions (1)303 As far as the Mars programme will request a huge financial effort,it is very likely that this programme will be carried out on an international, cooperation basis. This should normally be reflected by the internationality of the crew. For instance, people with different religions, languages, races, food habits could be selected. Hence, this heterogeneity of the group will have to be taken into account when selecting and training the crew. Even if crew is international a common language, namely English, is an absolute necessity. The perfect knowledge of this language is a selection criteria. The communication between crew members with this common language must be done without any obstacles. Nevertheless, it is possible for the astronauts during private communications to use their respective native languages. Communication between crew members and to mission control should be in English. This is to prevent frustration of not being able to understand what is being said for the other astronauts. In selection of crews one should avoid that other languages than English is common to subgroups in the crew, any such language might create conflicts within the crew. 1.5 Crew gender A main source of data on this topic comes from the Antarctic research and experience. Mixed crews have been reported to winter-over since 1946 (52). In the early period mixed crews were generally husbands and wives. There is now considerable experience with unmarried participants, and with female station leaders. There are also examples of Antarctic expeditions in peril due to sexual tension and conflicts. This is a delicate issue, which will be further detailed and discussed in this presentation, but one cannot exclude mixed gender crews for piloted missions to Mars. We do not know of data on confinement for longer periods of time. When crews are mixed the inevitable question is whether there will be sexual activities. The issue may even be raised with one-gender crews. Even if the general position is that this certainly is best left to the individuals themselves, the presence or absence of such activities in a small crew under long confinement may be a main source of conflicts and tension. Married couples are no guarantee. Sexual deprivation may lead to loss of motivation, boredom, depression, conflicts, and increased aggressiveness. These phenomena may be stronger if objects of sexual attraction are present. There is considerable information that sexual abstinence is possible over long periods, even lifelong, without any physiological or psychological concequences. No known psychology batteries have been developed, to our knowledge, for selection for low sexual activity, or tolerance of sexual abstinence. 1.6 Crew autonomy When considering Mars mission constraints (long distance from Earth, delayed communications, no escape possibilities ) it is obvious that the crew becomes more responsible for its survival, and will have to be more autonomous than ordinary space travellers. This crew autonomy means that, not only normal, but also emergency situations will be the full responsibility of the crew (crisis management, hardware failures, workload reorganisation). This means also that the “relationship” between ground and crew will be different from the one we presently know for space missions. The crew will have to make decisions in real time on its own, partly due to the fact that ground support may not be quick enough, efficient, or even possible. The crew must be prepared for this autonomy and supported on board by appropriate expert systems for problem solving and decision making. This autonomy is also a source of concern for the management of internal conflicts, and conflicts with mission control. Tensions between ground and crew have been reported (Skylab, Salyut, Mir, STS). It may be a symptom of real problems on board. It is also a possibility that the crew might unite in a fight with mission control, and that internal conflicts are solved by joining against a common enemy. 1.7 Crew activities Many tasks such as navigation, spacecraft inspection and maintenance will be automated as much as possible in order to reduce repetitiveness and boredom. Nevertheless, manual back-up will always be possible mainly for safety reasons. Table 1.7-1 proposes and gives an idea about the range of activities which could be performed during the mission. Table 1.7-1 : Mission Activities (1)304 H. Ursin etaL On-duty * * * * * * * * * Mission operations Spacecraft operatisns maintenance and repair Workshop activities Simulation, Training, Education EVA Physicsl exercises Medical checking Coiiinunications Hygiene Food Off-duty Personal recreation * Hobbies * Coninunications * Relaxation * PC-activities Group recreation * * * Celebration Interactive games Comunication with prominent persons 1.8 Stressors and Reinforcers Table 1.8-1 summarises what has been said before and selection of psychological profiles should be made. constitutes the basement on which Table 1.8-1 : Stressors and Reinforcers Stressors * * * * * * * * * * 2. Danger (hardware failures, radiations - . -) social iuolation (far from Earth, no escape - . -) Confinement (limited volume for long period ..) Smafl group (continuous presence of the same associates) Emotional control to maintain group cohesion Tasks repetitiveness associated with boredom and monotony Lack of iumnediate status reward Sexual deprivation Social deprivation Sensory deprivation Reinforcers * * * * * * Participation to a unique and outstanding adventure Challenge: overcoming difficulties Extending knowledge and experience Supporting goal in life Financial advantage Prestige _______________________________________ PSYCHOLOGICAL IMPACTS 2.1 AT VARIOUS PERIODS OF THE MISSION 2.1.1 Selection of crew members At the individual selection step the classical ways used for the psychological evaluation of astronaut candidates are (53): - performance tests personality tests behaviour observations social skills interviews Performance eval uati on It is obvious that the “above profile” is requested for the performance aspects. A biographical analysis and a qualification review of each candidate is a first step to verify if the minimum required is fulfilled. At a second step of the selection process an evaluation is done through different tests (see Figure 2.1.1). Figure 2.1.1 Performance Evaluation of astronaut used through Europe 1. Area concerned Mathematical-logical thinking Number of tests 2-3 tests 2. Physico-technical knowledge and comprehension 3. English 4. Memory associate-auditory visual 3-4 5. Perception (auditory, visual) speed 2-3 tests 6. Attention 7. Spatial srientation 2-3 tests 2 tests tests 2-3 tests Ideal Psychological Profiles for Crews ofSpace Missions (1)305 A failure in one area may be a cause of rejection. The minimum required is to be in the best 10 percentile (or stanine 8-9) of the reference group for the most of areas (53). No change in these criteria seem required when moving from ordinary short duration space missions to long duration missions. The main reason is that high levels of efficiency in each crew member have a safety impact on the mission. Personal ity This is the field where It seems necessary to make a difference between a short duration and a long term mission. The figure 2.1.2 gives the different traits of personality evaluated and the area of acceptance as given by the ESA/SPICE/OP/(53). This “scheme” has been used for short duration missions, space shuttle missions, spacelab missions and short missions in USSR. These are the criteria used by ESA. We will first describe them, and then discuss the rational behind these selection principles. Figure 2.1.2 Personality traits: area of acceptance for short duration mission Stanine scores 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 S X S S S S S I I I I I X S I Motivation Flexibility X Mobility Readiness to bear privation Extraversion S S Aggressiveness S I Dominance I I Empathy Emotional stability Vitality X S I X I I I I I X I I S I I X I I S S X I I I I S I It is assumed that for a long term mission, candidates should meet the following personality profiles (see ref: 1, 3, 14, 25, 26, 29, 30, 43, 44): low low-medium medium aggressiveness flexibility motivation vitality extraversion mobility dominance empathy very high readiness to withstand deprivation emotional stability The personality traits scheme for long term missions, therefore, may be quite different from what has been assumed to be adequate for short term missions (see Figure 2.1.3). Figure 2.1.3 Personality traits: area of acceptance for long term mission Stanine 1 2 3 4 5 6 X X S S S S S 5 5 S S S S S X S Motivation Flexibility X Mobility Readiness to bear privation Extraversion 5 Empathy Aggressiveness X X Dominance S S S S 9 S S X 8 S Emotional stability Vitality 7 S According to this selection system, the commonality between the ideal personality traits for (1)306 H.Ursin et aL Stanine I 2 3 4 Motivation Flexibility — Mobility — — 5 6 0 0 0 0 0 — 0 0 5 0 0 Empathy — 0 Dominance 0 Emotional stability 0 — Aggressiveness 0 8 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Readiness to bear privation Extraversion 7 0 0 0 Vitality It is assumed that a medium level of “aggressiveness” may be acceptable for a short term mission, but not desirable for a long term mission. An excess of “vitality” may not be useful for a long term mission. Critique of the selection princiøles The underlying assumption for the discussions of the selection principles as outlined in ESA/SPICE/OP/(53) is that the psychological tests really measure what they claim to measure. This is not necessarily true. In particular it should be realized that a psychological operationalization of a term, or, more simply, a psychological test, measure a dimension which has been given a name by the psychologist. The test and the underlying psychological dimension is a reality, but the name is open for interpretation. What the psychologists call intelligence may or may not coincide with the common sense terminology. This is particularly problematic with the personality tests. The names refer to psychological tests that have not been published, and remain private property by professional testers. This means that the scientific community at large, including the psychologists, remain without any real possibility to decide or advice as to what the tests really measure. The alternative is to use only published test material. This opens some possibility of faking, or cheating. However, no personality test is without faking possibilities, and there are also professional tricks to reveal faking, at least for some of the tests most used. It is also a problem that some of the psychological dimensions defined in the ESA/SPICE/OP/(53) are controversial, or without much meaning to other psychologists, or with many different and sometimes mutually exclusive definitions. “Aggression”, for instance, covers a wide range of behaviors and attitudes. In animals the term covers four different and independent motivational systems (Ursin 1984). In humans the situation is even more complex. We discriminate between verbal and overt aggression, instrumental and affective aggression, defensive behaviors (another large and complex term), hostility and extreme goal directed behavior, lack of concern for others, etc. The taxonomy of aggression in animals is complex, in humans it may be fair to say that the situation is chaotic. Vitality, empathy, flexibility and so on are also terms that in spite of the definitions given in ESA/SPICE/OP/(53), psychologists need to know which test the term refers to. There are numerous examples of tests of very well defined terms in psychology (e.g. defense, see 01ff et al 1990) that either do not correlate, or correlate poorly, or correlate negatively with each other. Before the final selections are made, therefore, the tests on which the selection criteria are based should be made available to the scientific community in psychology, to guarantee that we send the best human material on this very long and expensive trip. The tests must be demonstrated to be valid, it must be shown that they really predict behavior and attitudes that matter for long term isolation. This can only be done in long-lasting simulation studies. There are more tests of potential interest for long-term isolation than what is currently being evaluated for selection of astronauts. There are personality tests that are directly related to physiological adaptations to stressful environments, and breakdown in adaptation, that have not yet been tried, or compared with tests currrently in use. It also seems rasconcuhln tn csyaminn narcnnslitv trsite ilirpn-tlv rea1~t~d tn nntiønrp ~pfl~p nf timn Ideal Psychological Profiles for Crews of Space Missions (1)307 Social behaViQAir The assumed ideal social profiles are detailed in paragraph 2.2.3. Social conflicts should be avoided. A low-medium extraversion may be important. Furthermore, the candidate should have: - social ability to provide and receive “group support” (2) - social adaptability (14) This area may be evaluated through group behaviour observations and interview techniques. Small group behaviour should also be studied in simulation studies in confined environments. A long duration observation of the group will be particularly useful. 2.1.2 Selection of the crew Before analysing the interindividual crew member compatibility, it is necessary to define parameters of the crew. The crew size proposed for a preliminary Mars exploration mission is from 4 to 6 crew members (50). Based on this number, and the need for crew autonomy, we try to identify the quality of each crew member. - - The common personality traits have been mentioned in the paragraph 2.1.1. Contemporary psychology and psychophysiology have more to offer for selection of long-duration flights than what is currently in use or planned for use in selection. These new developments should be explored. The stability and efficiency of the group structure is crucial for the mission (14, 2, 3). A leadership must be identified and must be accepted by the other crew members. The duty of this crew member will be to organize the group, to maintain the stability of the group, to prevent and solve crises and to solve problems. This crew member must have the highest professional capacities, and must have personal skills that make him/her acceptable as an authority figure. Through these skills and accepted seniority and leadership he or she must be able to influence interpersonal relations (30). The selection of such a profile will probably be particularly difficult. To ensure the autonomy of the crew, high levels of skill and knowledge must be present in the crew. The trouble shooting capacity of the crew must be maximum. That must be able to identify and solve problems related to: localization, navigation, computer systems, software, mechanical hardware, medicine, psychology, and electrical hardware. The group performance must be optimized in all situations: nominal, degraded or emergency: - The organisation of the crew must leave a freedom of action. A discretion between each crew duty must be preserved (30). The level of responsibility between each crewmember must be well defined and equivalent, except for the leader. Turn over of the roles during the mission is debatable. It increases the risk of conflicts within the crew, even if on an individual point of view there is a bigger risk of monotony. Gender in the crew A mixed-sex crew may increase the risk of conflicts, but it may also work the other way. If the number of crew is odd a non-mixed crew is recommended. If the number of crew is even, one sex crews or mixed crews (with successfully married couples) might be considered. However, almost nothing is known about all-female or mixed crew operating under conditions of isolation (49). Therefore more studies should be recommended in this area. - For a candidate a declared homosexuality, which is psychologically accepted and mastered, should not be a select-out criteria. However, the rest of the crew should be consulted on this issue before the mission. Age of the crew member Due to the risk of radiation, it is unreasonable to fly the too young male and female The ideal age is probably between 45 and 55 years. For younger personnel, conservation of sperms or ovas should be considered. Other psychological asoects. (1)308 H. Ursin er al. For the group stability and function, it is necessary that each crew member has knowledge of culture, values and life style and life situations of the other crew members. The relation with long-term group tends to be personal-based on strong attachments among members (49). The autonomy of the group must be strong enough to be sustained without the help of the Ground Control Centre. The communication with ground may be used in case of incapacity to solve a problem, or in case to protect the stability of the group. Communication with Ground Control Centre, psychologists, and family should be used to furnish social and psychological support for each crew member. Private space must be available for each crew member. A minimum participation in the crew life must be maintained: i.e. common time for eating, recreation, celebration, and mutual social support. 2.1.3 Psychological preparation of the mission Before launch the crew must be trained to sustain the mission constraints. In addition to individual training, crew training and simulation of long duration confinements are necessary. Common training in difficult environment should have two interests: the first will be to test the crew compatability and coherence, the second will be to train the crew members themselves. Some psychological crisis simulation with resolution using group techniques must be done. The stability of the group should be created and preserved. In case of crisis, the crew must be able to solve the crisis to restore the balance and stability of the group. The crew members must be trained to detect and manage interpersonal frictions and conflicts. Before mission this kind of training should have a preventive effect, and, in case of crisis, it gives the crew the autonomy for resolution of such conflicts (49). The main recommendations are: - - - perform long simulations of the mission (2 months or longer) with or without a difficult environment, but under real confinement, (to avoid the failure of the Skylab simulations); train the crew for diagnosis and management for interpersonal frictions and conflicts. This training must be given at the individual level and later for the whole crew; investigate to which extent the combined characteristics of the crew reflect individual characteristics and capabilities of each crew members. the 2.1.4 Psychological suoDort during mission The most important principle is the autonomy of the crew. In the psychological area this principle is certainly essential. In case of crisis and incapacity of the crew to solve the crisis, a ground support through an audio-video link should be necessary. A discrete monitoring from ground of the behaviour of the crew and of each crew member is hopeful. A periodic meeting, involving the ground psychological support, should analyse the crew dynamics and its evolution. be established to We must keep in mind that ground control centre must function as a psychological support system for the crew. This function may be unpleasant, the crew might appear unreasonable in their complaints and demands. It is necessary to train the staff of the control centre to furnish the crew with this particular support. The ground psychological support must interact not only with the crew, but also with the staff of the control centre the psychological support to crew facilities should not be forgotten. During the mission it is important to maintain a good level of information for the crew on what happens on Earth during the mission (news, culture, policy, science), and about the events in their families and among friends. Audio/video links with mission control, friends and family should be planned on a regular basis. 2.1.5 Psychological suoDort after mission The reassimilation of the crew members in their home communities may be difficult for several reasons: Each crew member will receive an excess of radiation. The present estimations are about 73 Rem (S. Natchvey and J.C. Yanc - IAA Tashkent October 1989). More pessimist - - +k~ mA D,,.,. ir ~ 1-k,. +,.#..1 ,1,.... ...ui1 k.. L~.L Ideal Psychological Profiles for Crews of Space Missions - - - - (1)309 After a period of 1.5 2.5 years in a confined micro-society, the return to an open society certainly will be a stress. - The media impact of the first explorers will be very important. The “ticker tape parades” and public appearances and other acknowledgements will certainly be an important part of their activities. The return to the family may be a problem. on the side of family obligations. The cost of such an expedition can be high The return to the home community should be prepared before landing. During the last months of the mission the contacts with family members should be increased. For media the policy may be the same. During the return to Earth, the frequency of audio-video linked press conferences should be increased to avoid a sudden exposure to the “media circus”. After landing the reinsertion in the home community should be gradual. A period in a “crew quarter” and quarantine with progressive participation of family members may be an appropriate solution to avoid a rough change of the crew rhythms, and to decrease the stresses of the return. If more dramatic and intense unifications are used, proper psychological support should be available. The astronauts should also be supported in their professional reinsertion after the mission. 2.2 IDENTIFICATION OF KEY PSYCHOLOGICAL PARAMETERS 2.2.1 At the soacecraft design level This topic is widely discussed in the paper: “Habitability Constraints and Objectives for a Mars Manned Mission: Internal Architecture Considerations” in the next presentation of the session. The following important recommendations have been made: - - free volume per crew member will have to be drastically increased with comparison volumes available in present programmes (US Orbiter, Soyuz, Mir ...); to when allocating volumes to crew members, the need for privacy will be considered an important parameter. The prominent role of the leader in maintaining group cohesion and in influencing interpersonal relationships will probably require him to be provided with more room than the other members of the crew. Nevertheless, the need for privacy will not prevent the crew to meet and work together in optimal conditions. Consequently, in addition to the usual zones used generally to describe human habitats (private, common, service zones) a fourth zone, so-called “recreational zone”, is proposed to be implemented within the spacecraft. This zone will be dedicated either for workshop or other types of leisure activities which will permit group activities and maintenance of group harmony at as high a level as possible. Safety will be an important matter in the design of the spacecraft in order to keep the crew confident and trusting the hardware and equipment on which their lives rely. This is applicable not only on passive safety (e.g. radiation protection) but also active safety (e.g. manual back-up of automated functions and commands). 2.2.2 At the individual level From what had been said in 2.1,KEY psychological parameters at individual level may be as follows: * The highest adaptability and autonomy * The highest emotional stability * High task competence (the leader having the highest one) * High level of social skills * Low aggressivity * Low tendency of attacking others * High level of conflict resolution * Good interpersonal comprehension, affinity and compatibility * Medium Initiative and creativity - H. Ursin eraL (1)310 * * * The highest capabilities for leadership: this means that the hierarchy will not be imposed tyrannically but will be freely accepted by the crewmembers This authority will be based on the recognition bf the leader’s “capabilities” by the others. The highest qualities for management. High “humanistic” qualities, which reflect in addition to the leader’s highest professional and technical capabilities a very good and wide cultural background (psychology, philosophy, art...). 2.2.3 At the group level It will be important to make sure that individual capabilities can be expressed without disrupting the group, and distrurb the other crew members. Long term simulation studies of selected candidates should be used to examine the validity of the following characteristics for 9ood group functioning: * The highest group autonomy, harmony and stability. * Acceptance of leadership. It should be demonstrated here that the group is functioning more like a micro-society than an ordinary team, and that interpersonal affinity and group dynamics can take place. Good mutual motivation and stimulation * Good social/ethnic compatibility. * The mixture within the crew of people having various attitudinal features seems desirable because an extreme attitudinal homogeneity might cause boredom and undermine a crew’s problem solving potential (49). Figure 2.3.3-1 shows how the leader and other members of the crew could be selected in terms of “social profiles”, and Figure 2.3.3-2 describes briefly these 4 social profiles (11). Again, it should be stated that we refer to non-published material. This system is one of many privately owned evaluation systems used by industry to pick leaders and construct teams. Figure 2.3.3-1; CREW SOCIAL PROFILE (-) emotivity scaie ANALYTICAL TYPE LEADER TYPE * affirmation scale (-) ********•* * * I * ************* 2 (+) ************* COOPERATIVE TYPE > EXPRESSIVE TYPE v (+) (I) recommended social profile of the leader of the crew (2) recommended social profile of the other crew members If one accepts the underlying assumptions of these figures, the following conclusions may be drawn: The leader should have a more marked “leader type” than the other crewmembers. For the other crewmembers a mixture of the analytical and cooperative profiles with a slight accent of leadership would be desirable. The expressive profile has to be strongly avoided mainly due to emotional unstability and too impulsive behaviours. We are, again, unable to evaluate the system. There are tools for this type of evaluation, and they should be used. However, even if Industry is using these privately owned scoring systems, the issue is again that it is impossible for the scientific community to evaluate the quality and the scientific background for the statements. One should not accept the 1oh~1c nn thm ,IimDnomnnO wlthni.f rlnriimomntatinn i.aith ,‘mfmromnrgu tn tomot mmtmmvixl that ic Ideal Psychological Profiles for Crews ofSpace Missions Figure 2.3.3-2 2.3 (1)311 DESCRIPTION OF SOCIAL PROFILES PROFILE DONINANT STYLE LEADER Autocratic ANALYTICAL ~Avo1ding’ Behaviour COOPERATIVE Accepts leadership EXPRESSIVE Aggressive WANTS Results Improvements Attention Applauses LIKES Efficiency Accuracy Courtesy Stimulation PRESERVES His time His integrity Relationahip His effort NEEDS AN To build ENVIRONMENT ‘systems’ Which gives details Which suggests an action plan Provide inspiration LIKES PARTNERS SUPPORTING Their conciusions & actions Their principles Their reiationand way of ship & feelings thinking Their dreams & intuitions WEAK POINT To listen To decide To initiate To check BEFORE DECIDING NEEDS Options & Probabilities Proof of usefulness Guaranties & insurances Recognition & stimulation SPECIALITY Management Techniques Support Social Astronaut Psychological Assessment 2.3.1 Available means: The number of available tests for performance evaluation is very important (5, 35). The most important difficulty is the language utilized for these tests; even at this step of the selection the English language practice will probably be mandatory for candidates. As we have mentioned above the results of these evaluations must be in the best 10 percentiles of the concerned population. An overall analysis of the results will allow psychologists to bring an answer about the acceptability of each candidate. More attention should be placed on the combination of skills than on simple evaluation test by test. We have discussed the ideal personality profile for the Mars mission candidates and crews (see paragraphs 2.1.1, 2.2.2 and 2.2.3). To evaluate the personality traits a lot of batteries (28, 38, 49, 53) exist. The obstacles of language complicate the issue. Even if the candidates have a perfect mastery of English language, many tests are still culture dependent, and may involve ideoms and special meanings of words hidden for those that use English as their second language. It is possible that we will have to work out special European batteries- in English- for non-English applicants. The observations of behaviour in group dynamic tests will be very useful techniques at the level of the individual selection and at the level of the crew selection. The observation of the behaviour during problem solving in a group, and the observation of the interpersonal relationship within the group during simulation studies will help psychologists evaluate the social skills and the behaviour of each crewmember in small group situations. Such observations also make it possible to evaluate the efficiency of the crew itself. In this area the techniques need to be improved and probably to constraints of a Mars exploratory mission. be adapted for the The utilization of interview techniques must be used at the individual selection step. The interview boards must be a mixture of professionals of recruitment, psychologists, astronauts, engineers, scientists and managers involved in space activities. We can distinguish three kinds of interviews: * scientific and technical interviews * general interviews * psychological and/or psychiatric interviews These Interviews must be carried out after other evaluations. The conclusions issued from the preliminary tests must be available for the interviewers. These interviews will clarify some doubts and will confirm the preliminary results. A consensus must be (1)312 H. Ursin Ct al. 2.3.2 Needs of Future Studies Some questions seem to be completely open: what should be the gender of the crew? If a mixed crew is acceptable, what must be the relationship inside this group? Is an organisation in couples acceptable? how to minimize the impacts of the ethnical and cultural differences? Some research activities seem necessary: - - - - to improve and to adapt the techniques of observation in small group dynamics. to create a psychological training program for the crew, the flight control center staff and families. to create a training program to improve the autonomy of the crew in environments. risky to validate current test systems for selection. long ~imul~tions will be necessaty to select the crew and during the pre-flight per~oato improve the autonomy ot the crew. 3. CONCLUSION The conclusion is an attempt to make some recommendations on the following questions for successful Mars type missions: - - 1. 2. Who are the right candidates? Which is the right crew? 3.1 At the individual level We have seen that for candidates the most important parameters were: A very high emotional stability and ability to withstand deprivation and at the other extremity of the scale a low aggressiveness and vitality. In addition, the candidates should all have a very high professional capability and efficiency. A general call for candidates could follow SHACKLETON’s advertisement in 1913 for selecting people for an Antarctic expedition: .“men wanted for hazardous journey, limited comfort, years of confinement in hostile environment. Safe return doubtful.., but entering mankind History in case of success”... .. The more targetted approach to potential candidates should make it clear that an international crew composed of 6 astronauts, males and females is wanted. For preparing them for this challenging mission they will be submitted to an intensive training covering physical, psychological, scientific, technical and operational aspects for several years.They should be in general good health, must be from the ESA member states, aged between 40 and 50 years, having completed an academic degree, and fully mastering the English language. It should also be clear that the selected candidates will be contracted at interesting rates. They will fly only 1 Mars mission i.e. 1.5 to 2.5 years. After the mission they will be proposed re-insertion opportunities. Experience in space related activities should not be a mandatory condition for participation. No particular specification on the leader will be made at that stage. This issue should be tackled at crew selection level and particularly during the simulation and the training exercises. This call for candidates should remain as open as possible if we want in a further stage to get a wide variety of people within the selected crew. Psychological selection should also pay attention to the danger of getting too homogenous groups. However, this has to be balanced with compatibility between different profiles. 3.2 At crew level One of the most important factors is the prominent personality and role of the leader within the crew, and the fundamental principle of the crew autonomy. There are few rules to predict the chances of success of the “right crew”; this will rely mainly on the results got from the training and simulation exercises where affinity and group I.,...dynamics between the 1 Tha .*C4,.$+4ne ~ e,.... ~nna,t. rrnwmamkarc tall ~ IL.. Ideal Psychological Profiles for Crews of Space Missions (1)3 13 The only valid testing of the many assumptions in this area is the realistic simulations of long term isolation in as realistic situations as possible. Only data from “real people” in “real situations” will give us real information on what it takes to sustain the psychological loads involved in Mars trips and other long term space travels. All these tests and simulations do not aim at suppressing all risks but rather to validate an overall approach which makes the psychological risks associated with such missions acceptable and ethical. REFERENCES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. Stokols Altman, Handbook of Environmental Psychology, John Wiley & Sons, Ch. 7, 8, 9, 2 NASA, Research opportunities in human behaviour and performances, NASA Contractor Repor 3886, April 1985 G.R. Hooper, The soviet cosmonaut team, Univelt San Diego, p. 12-22, 1986 Vaernes, Warncke, Bergan, Ursin, Selecting the right crew for future space stations, Space & Sea, p. 47-51, Nov. 1987 NATO, Performance Assessment Register, AGUARO R-763, Aug. 1988 A.A. Leonov, V.1. Lebedev, Psychological characteristics of the activity of cosmonauts, NASA TT F-727-1973 Dr Sally K. Ride, Leadership and America’s Future in Space, A Report to the Administrator, p. 32-35, 52-54, August 1987 NASA’s Plans for Manned Missions to the Moon and Mars, Spaceflight vol. 31, p. 297-302, Sept. 1989 T. Damon, Introduction to Space: The science of spaceflight, Orbit Book Company Malabar p. 179-198, Florida 1989 CJB (ESA Contract 7612/88), Habitability Critical Technologies, TN1, TN2, Final Report, Dec. 1989 Wilson Learning Corporation, Resumé des Styles Sociaux, WLC 45-30-70/V21-913 W.R. Pogue, How to go to the Bathroom in Space 84 days in space: American record, Tom Doherty Associates New York 1985 A.J.W. Taylor, Behavioural Science and outer space research, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, p. 815-817, August 1989 I.C. Statler & C.E. Billings, Maintaining Human Productivity during Mars Transit, 19th ICES San Diego, SAE 891435, 10 pages, July 1989 P.A. Santy, Psychiatric components of a health maintenance facility on space station, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 58, p. 1219-24, 1987 Nick. Kanas M.D., Psychological training for physician aboard the the space station, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, Vol.59, p. 456-7, 1988 C.M. Pierce, Mental Health factors in spaceflight, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine,Vol. 59, p. 99-101, 1987 J.M. Christensen, J.M. Talbot, A review of psychological aspects of spaceflights, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 57, p. 203-212, 1986 R.A. Alkov, M.S. Borowsky, A Questionnaire study of psychological background factors in US Naval aircraft accidents, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 51, p. 860-3, 1980 N. Kanas, Psychosocial training for physicians on board the space station, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, p. 456-7, May 1988 T.R. Carretta, USAF Pilot selection and classification systems, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, p. 46-9, Jan. 1989 P.H. Platenius, G.J.S. Wilde, Personal characteristics related to accident Histories of Canadian pilots, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, p. 42-45, Jan 1989 H. C. Foushee, The role of communications, sociological, and personality factors in maintenance of crew communication, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, p. 1062-1066, Nov. 1982 P. Buchanan, What kind of physicians for space, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, p. 730-1, July 1987 G.R.J. Hockey, Psychological factors in human performance under stress: implications for long duration spaceflights, MRC/ESRC social and apllied psychology unit, Opt. of Psychology University of Sheffield N. Kanas, Psychosocial factors affecting simulated and actual space missions, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, p. 806-11, Aug. 1985 E.H. Emurian, Programmed Environment Management of confined microsocieties, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, p. 976-80, Oct. 1988 R.L. Helmreich, Applying psychology in outer space, American Psychologist, Vol. 38, No. 4, p. 445-50, 1983 J.M. Nicholas, Small groups in orbit: group~ interaction and crew flrt performance on space ~ n 1flflQ_l~ 1QR7 - (1)3 14 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56 H. Ursin er a!. N. Kanas, Psychological and Interpersonal Issues, Am. J. Psychiat. 144, p. 703-9, 1987 N. Kanas, W. Feddersen, Behavioral, psychiatric and sociological problems of long-duration space missions , NASA TMX 58067 Houston 1971 D.R. Jones, C.A. Annes, The evolution and present status of mental health standards for selection of USAF candidates for space missions, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 54, p. 730-4, 1983 R.H. Cox, Utilisatlon of psychomotor screening for USAF pilot candidates: enhancing predictive validity, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, p. 640-5, July 1988 H.O. Leimann, The right and wrong staff In civil aviation, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, p. 955-9, Oct. 1988 P.K. Senechal, A.C. Traweek, The aviation psychology programme at RAF upper HEYFORD, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, p. 973-5, Oct. 1988 J.F. Kantor, T.R. Carretta, Air crew selection systems, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, p. A32-A3, Nov. 1988 B.G. Kanki, S. Lozito, H.C. Foushee, Communication and indices of crew coordination, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, p. 56-60, Jan. 1989 J.F. Terelak, Trends in Polands in space psychology research, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, p. 352-360, Apr. 1989 M.T. Banich, A. Stokes, V.C. Elledge, Neuropsychological screening of aviators: review, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, p. 361-66, Apr. 1989 B.G. Kanki, H.C. Foushee, Communication as group process mediator of air crew performance, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, p. 402-10, May 1989 R. Vaernes, R. Haytten, A. Jensen, Effects of underwater escape training: a psychophysiological study, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, p. 460-64, May 1989 J.M. Nicholas, Interpersonal and group behaviour skills training for crews on space station, Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, p. 603-608, June 1989 A. Grigoriev, 0. Krozerko, V. Myasnikov, A. Egorov, Ethical problems of interaction between ground based personnel and orbital station crew members, IAF 86, Insbruck, 86-398, Austria, 4 pages, 1986 H. Haas, H. Kammel, The visual stress model. A psychophysiological method for the evaluation of operational reliability of pilots and cosmonauts, IAF 85, Stockholm 85-326, Sweden, 21 pages, 1985 J. Rivolier, C. Bachelard, Study of analogies between living conditions at an Antarctic scientific base and on a space station, ESA/SSM/LTPO, 1988 Dr. Veron, Psychosocial aspects of long duration spaceflights, ESA/SSM/LTPO, HUSAP/WP/1 5 pages, 1989 M.M. Connors, A.A. Harrison, F.R. Akins, Living Aloft Human Requirements for extended spaceflight, NASA SP 483, Chap. V, p. 145-184, Chap. VII, p. 217-25 Strogonova, Manned Expedition to Mars: Concepts and Problems, IM, Tashkent 89-10, USSR 1989 N. Collins, Mission to Mars, National Geographical Magazine National Geographical Society, p. 733-764, Nov. 1988 A.J.W. Taylor, Antarctic Psychology, Science Information Publishing Centre Wellington 1987 ESA/SPICE, Spacelab payload Integration and coordination in Europe: Psychological evaluation of European Spacelab payload specialists, ESA/SPICE/OPS (77)730, Annex III H. URSIN, Expectancy and Activation: An attempt to systematize stress theory, Neurobiological approach to human disease, 0. Helihamer, I. Florin, H. Weiner (Eds), TORONTO, H. HUBER, p. 313-334, 1988 M. OLFF, G. GOOAERT, J.F. BROSSCHOT, K.E. WEISS, H. URSIN, Tachistoscopic and questionnaire methods for measurement of psychological defenses, Scandinavian Journal of Psychology (in press), 1990 H. URSIN, Neuroanatomical basis of aggression, Multidisciplinary approaches to aggression research P.F. Brain, 0. Benton (Eds), Amsterdam, Elsevier, p. 269-293, 1981 -