| |
| |
Current Selection Filters |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Risk 24: Human Performance Failure Due to Poor Psychosocial Adaptation |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Crosscutting Area : Behavioral Health and Performance |
| |
| Discipline : Behavioral Health & Performance and Space Human Factors (Cognitive) |
| |
| Description : Human performance failure may occur due to problems associated with adapting to the space environment, interpersonal relationships, group dynamics, team cohesiveness, and pre-mission preparation |
| |
|
Context / Risk Factors :
The isolated and confined nature of space flight, along with its potential hazards, pose human performance related challenges. This risk may be influenced by boredom with available food, crew autonomy and increased reliance on each other, crowding, distance from family and friends, duration of flight, incompatible crewmembers, interpersonal tensions, mechanical breakdowns, poor communications, scheduling constraints and requirements, sleep disturbances, or social isolation.
|
| |
| Justification / Rationale : Moderate likelihood/high consequence risk with low risk mitigation status. Serious interpersonal conflicts have occurred in space flight. The failure of flight crews to cooperate and work effectively with each other or with flight controllers has been a periodic problem in both US and Russian space flight programs. Interpersonal distrust, dislike, misunderstanding and poor communication have led to potentially dangerous situations, such as crewmembers refusing to speak to one another during critical operations, or withdrawing from voice communications with ground controllers. Such problems of group cohesiveness have a high likelihood of occurrence in prolonged space flight and if not mitigated through prevention or intervention, they will pose grave risks to the mission. Lack of adequate personnel selection, team assembly, or training has been found to have deleterious effects on work performance in organizational research studies. The duration and distance of a Mars mission significantly increases this risk. The distance also reduces countermeasure options and increases the need for autonomous behavioral health support systems |
| |
| Reference Missions :
|
| |
| |
 |
| |
Risk Rating
|
|
|
| |
Current Countermeasures
|
- Language and cultural training,
- Personal in-flight communications with Earth
- Post-flight debriefs
- Pre-flight training and teambuilding,
- Self-report monitoring of adaptation during mission with private psychological conference
- Select-out criteria
- In-flight and preflight psychological support
|
|
|
| |
Projected Countermeasures or Mitigations and Other Deliverables with their CRL/TRL scores
|
- Development of individual performance enhancement plan for each crewmember [CRL 1]
- Individual and team selection for long-duration missions [CRL 3]
- Monitoring & early detection of adaptation problems [CRL 3]
- Predictive model of adaptability to long-duration missions [CRL 1]
- Select-in criteria
|
|
|
| |
Research & Technology Questions
|
| 24a |
What are the fundamental behavioral and social stressors during long-duration missions that will most likely affect crew performance, both individual and team, and how can they be studied for elimination or accomodation in Earth analogue environments |
1 |
| 24b |
What factors contribute to the breakdown of individual/team performance and mission support coordination with regard to scheduling, prioritization of work activities, and control of timelines |
1 |
| 24c |
What behaviors, experiences, personality traits and leadership styles in crewmembers most contribute to optimal performance? How are these factors related to performance of individuals and teams |
2 |
| 24d |
What criteria can be identified during the selection process and be used to select and assemble the best teams for long-duration missions |
2 |
| 24e |
What factors in crew design, composition, dynamics and size will best enhance the crew's ability to live and work in the space environment? How are these factors different from shorter duration missions |
2 |
| 24f |
How can attitudes and behaviors of agency management, ground controllers, crewmembers and their families be modified to maintain and improve individual and group performance |
2 |
|
|
| |
Related Risks
|
|
|
| |
Important References
|
|
Kanas N. Psychiatric issues affecting long-duration space missions. Aviation Space & Environmental Medicine. 69:1211-1216, 1998.
|
|
McCormick IA, Taylor AJ, Rivolier J, & Cazes G. (1985). A psychometric study of stress and coping during the International Biomedical Expedition to the Antarctic (IBEA). J Human Stress. 11(4), 150-156.
|
|
Palinkas LA, Gunderson EK, Holland AW, Miller C, & Johnson JC. (2000) Predictors of behavior and performance in extreme environments: the Antarctic space analogue program. Aviat Space Environ Med. 71(6): 619-625.
|
|
Taylor AJ. (1998). Psychological adaptation to the polar environment. Int J Circumpolar Health. 57(1): 56-68.
|
|
Wood JA, Hysong SJ, Lugg DJ, & Harm DL. (2000) Is it really so bad? A comparison of positive and negative experiences in Antarctic winter stations. Environment and Behavior. 32(1): 85-110.
|
|
Wood JA, Lugg DJ, Hysong SJ, Eksuzian DJ, & Harm DL. (1999) Psychological changes in hundred-day remote Antarctic field groups. Environment and Behavior. 31(3): 299-337.
|
|
Connors MM, Harrison AA, and Faren RA. Living Aloft: Human requirements for extended space flight. NASA SP-483, Washington, D.C., National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1985.
|
|
Harrison AA, Clearwater YA, and McKay CA. (eds), From Antarctica to outer space: Life in Isolation and Confinement. NY, NY Springer-Verlag, 1991.
|
|
Palinkas LA. (1991) Effects of physical and social environments on the health and well-being of Antarctic winter-over personnel. Environment & Behavior. 23(6); 782-799.
|
|
Palinkas LA, & Gunderson EK. (1988) Applied anthropology on the ice: A multidisciplinary perspective on health and adaptation in Antarctica (No. 88-21). San Diego: Naval Health Research Center.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
