Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

L B Landon

Publications and source records attributed to L B Landon.

13 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2025

Measuring Unique Contextual Factors: Group Living Skills

BACKGROUND The Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Exploration Measures (HFBP-EM) suite is a set of standardized measures used to assess behavioral health and performance risks related to future exploration-class space missions. During the HFBP-EM suite development, the importance of assessing unique contextual factors to understand the drivers of team dynamics was identified. Group living skills are a unique workplace skill which applies to those coworkers who live and work together. As mission lengths become longer, the line between work and non-work life may blur. Extreme living conditions such as spaceflight can result in increased stress over time, negatively impact mood and well-being, decrease team cohesion and increase conflict, deteriorate task performance, and potentially reduce mission success [1]. With no breaks in their isolated and confined environment possible, living with a messy, inconsiderate crewmember can add to the stress. Alternatively, crews with good group living skills may support one another, mitigating the negative effects of the extreme environment. There was no direct measure of group living skills. This work sought to fill this measurement gap and collect data related to group living in isolated, confined, extreme (ICE) environments. METHODS Group living skills as an astronaut competency area were developed with the input of experts familiar with ICE environments. Distinct aspects of this competency were reviewed and discussed by a NASA-invited group of spaceflight experts in 2015 to identify individual and team behavioral health and performance measures for operational environments. This work resulted in a 5-item measure focused on group living experiences with each crewmember (or the crew as a whole). A 6th item asks whether an individual would go on another mission with a particular crewmember or crew as a measure of future-oriented group living, or team viability. The measure was deployed in 24 teams living and working together in isolated and confined environments (e.g., International Space Station, space mission simulation analogs). RESULTS & DISCUSSION In this presentation, we will summarize results which indicate the Group Living Skills (GLS) Survey is a reliable, valid, and operationally feasible measure. Reliability was evaluated in several ways. Two-way multilevel mixed models revealed strong repeated measures reliability (ICC2 = .902, Omega between = .954). Reliability of change within teams was strong (Rc = .81). Factor analysis showed a consistent two-factor structure when individuals rated either the whole crew, all individuals, just peers, or a focal roommate. The latter used a sociometric approach to rating the GLS of the roommates. The two factors were tidiness and being considerate of others. We assessed the criterion-related validity of GLS, by examining GLS operationalized as the team-level aggregated GLS Survey scores as a predictor of team viability, team cohesion, and team performance. We used generalized mixed models to account for the repeated measures and longitudinal data. The marginal R2 change was used to determine the extent to which GLS were related to the team outcomes while controlling for mission day and campaign. Results suggested GLS was strongly related to team viability (marginal R2 change = .40), team cohesion (marginal R2 change = 0.28), social cohesion (marginal R2 change = 0.25), and moderately related to task cohesion (marginal R2 change = 0.18). GLS scores had a small relationship with team performance (marginal R2 change = .08). Results support GLS as a measure that can be used to capture group living skills of crews who live and work together in ICE. Because the items were written to be broadly applicable, less extreme environments with teams living and working together for some length of time also benefit from this measure (e.g., college roommates, camps). See Landon et al. (2024) for full results [2]. SUMMARY We report reliability and validity evidence for a new measure that assesses the Group Living Skills for teams that live and work in operational environments such as spaceflight.

J C W Miller↗
NASA NTRS2025

Private Astronaut Post-Mission Debrief Interviews Study

BACKGROUND The commercialization of space will increasingly include individuals that are not rigorously-selected, highly-trained professional astronauts. Private astronaut missions (PAMs), such as Axiom-1 in 2022, will continue to travel to the International Space Station in the coming years, but the risk of integrating private astronauts with NASA astronauts has not been clearly quantified nor mitigated. An earlier internal NASA operations assessment, which consisted of a comprehensive literature review and interviews of current NASA experts, found that PAMs are likely to increase the risk to NASA astronauts during integrated missions (Landon, Whiting, Russell, Schorn, Passmore, & Roma, 2022). There are ongoing efforts at NASA to mitigate concerns from a medical, psychological, and technical perspective. NASA experts are working closely with PAM providers to offer recommendations and best practices beyond the limits of requirements to ensure crew health and safety. However, efforts are siloed between groups to some extent, and with the rate of PAMs likely to increase, a more comprehensive and integrated process is needed to reduce the burden on NASA resources. AIMS The purpose of this project is to understand private astronauts’ motivations for journeying to space, their pre-mission preparation period, and their experiences in space. Data will be collected via private astronaut post-mission debrief interviews. This data will inform training needs and in-mission support needed for missions that include private astronauts; the preparation NASA astronauts and mission support personnel will need to work with these integrated crews; and gaps in knowledge to guide research and countermeasure development. Our study aims to (1) Characterize risks posed by commercialization and private astronaut crew integration in spaceflight operations, as it relates to Team, Human Systems Integration Architecture (HSIA), and Behavioral Medicine (BMed) Risks, (2) Recommend potential countermeasures and identify gaps in current research. Countermeasures may be related to crew selection and composition, training, crew support systems (e.g., medical/psychological support, support from Mission Control, on-board resources), and habitability and human factors design. METHOD The BHP Lab will conduct 30-minute interviews with up to eight (8) private astronaut mission (PAM) astronauts (e.g., Axiom) and spaceflight participants (e.g., SFPs or “free flyers” on Polaris Dawn) per year from 2024-2030 to discuss knowledge gaps and needs related to selection and assessment, crew composition, training, crew support systems (e.g., medical/psychological support, support from Mission Control, onboard resources), and habitability and human factors design, which may influence the risk to NASA astronauts. Interviews will then be coded using thematic analysis and interpreted with the assistance of lexical analysis software (e.g., LIWC). As of the end of 2024, we have collected data from one PAM crew. At the conclusion of data collection in 2030, a final report will be prepared integrating all data collected by 2031. SUMMARY Post-return interviews of private astronauts are being conducted to understand their experiences and inform training and countermeasures to ensure the safety of all who journey to the ISS.

Private Astronaut Missions↗
NASA NTRS2025

Habitability and Human Factors Assessment (iSHORT, SHAQ, and SHU)

BACKGROUND As long-duration off-planet habitats become a reality, a consideration of habitability and human factors (HF) is crucial. The habitat is more than just a place to live and work. It is also the crew’s perception of the space, and the psychological impacts of size, layout, and usage over time; all of which can support or strain behavioral health and performance (BHP). A previous International Space Station (ISS) habitability study used the iSHORT (Space Habitability Observation Reporting Tool) to collect detailed data about habitability and human factors and inform NASA Standards. Of the previous iSHORT study, only one of the six ISS subjects had a duration of one year; all other ISS and ground analog subjects had shorter mission durations from one week to six months. It is necessary to collect new data with a focus on long-duration exploration missions of > 6 months and on planetary surface habitat design. New data is also needed to compare the iSHORT to other habitability measures. One measure, the SHAQ (Subjective Habitability and Acceptability Questionnaire), assesses the intersection of psychology and habitability. Another complementary measure, the Scale for Habitat Usability (SHU), is a brief subjective scale that captures how habitat design impacts perceived usability of the built environment in relation to task performance. OBJECTIVE Our study aims to (1) understand how individual well-being and team dynamics may relate to HF concerns over time, (2) capture how habitability and HF change over time, (3) compare the three habitability measures (iSHORT, SHAQ, SHU), (4) assess habitats to capture HF design concerns and related BHP impacts of a planetary habitat, and (5) inform future standards for HF design. METHOD Data are being collected on crews living and working in long-duration spaceflight analogs. Individual-level data collections are repeated at regular intervals throughout the missions on several habitat areas, activities, and key equipment (i.e., points of interest). These points of interest (POIs) include the kitchen/galley, crew quarters, and other work and living areas. Assessments include evaluations of privacy, comfort, convenience, control, efficiency, and social density through the lens of subsequent outcomes like sleep, individual performance, group activities performance, stress, mood, and social interactions. Pre- and post-mission evaluations will also allow comparison with homes, pre- and post-mission hotels, and a retrospective reflection of living and working in a long-duration analog. INITIAL DATA COLLECTIONS In this poster, we will describe the measures and data yield. Since the research protocol was designed, the study team has collected iSHORT Standalone four times, nine collections of SHAQ, and three collections of iSHORT with SHAQ. Data collection is ongoing. SUMMARY A novel assessment suite has been developed to further aid the comparison and complementary understanding of the habitability and human factors measures, which will allow for efficient deployment of these measures in analogs and/or spaceflight in near-term research as well as support well-being and performance through design.

J C W Miller↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NSCOR for Evaluating Risk Factors and Biomarkers for Adaptation and Resilience to Spaceflight: Emotional Valence and Social Processes in ICC/ICE Environments

Space exploration class missions, such as a mission to Mars, will require optimization of human performance, adaptability, and resilience. This NASA Specialized Center of Research (NSCOR) utilizes the NIMH Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) framework to identify biological and behavioral markers of individual social adaptation and emotional resilience (as well as vulnerability) to spaceflight-relevant stressors such as living in extended isolation. The overarching goal of this NSCOR is to obtain novel information to help identify biomarkers of individuals who are resilient and/or adaptable to the stressors of isolated, confined, and controlled (ICC) and isolated, confined, and extreme (ICE) environments.A total of N=90 healthy adult astronaut surrogates are being studied in three spaceflight-analog environments: (1) n=40 healthy adults in the Isolation and Confinement Analog Research Unit (ICARUS), an ICC at the University of Pennsylvania, during 7-day missions, for a target total of 280 subject days; (2) n=32 healthy adult astronaut surrogates studied in NASA’s Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA), an ICC at Johnson Space Center during 45-day missions, for a target total of 2,112 subject days; and (3) n=18 healthy adults in the Alfred-Wegener-Institute’s Neumayer Station III, an ICE in Antarctica, during 14-month missions, for a target total of 7,560 subject days. Dr. Nindl’s Laboratory at the University of Pittsburgh is analyzing a priori selected protein biomarkers in blood, saliva, and urine. Complementary rodent models of exposure to early life stressors, confinement, and isolation are being evaluated at Dr. Hensch’s Laboratory to further validate the neurobehavioral and biological findings from the human studies.Given the inconsistency and varied definition of resilience/adaptation in the scientific literature, the NSCOR team developed a composite resilience/adaptation measure that reflects the most relevant outcomes to resilience/adaptation across psychosocial and neurobehavioral functions, as well as neurocognitive and spaceflight-relevant operational performance. To achieve this, group consensus was attained from subject matter experts to produce a rank-order of importance for each input variable. The final resilience/adaptation score included 36 variables that were collected across spaceflight analogs. As of 10/1/2021, the NSCOR project acquired data on n=27 subjects at ICARUS, n=16 at HERA, and n=18 at Neumayer. The COVID-19 pandemic delayed data acquisition at ICARUS and HERA.Among subjects studied to date, 99% of neural and neurobehavioral data (e.g., neuroimaging for structure and function, behavioral measures) as well as blood, saliva, and urine for biochemical assays have been acquired. For rodent models, Dr. Hensch’s laboratory has established biochemical and behavioral parameters reflecting confinement stress in social networks of mice for comparison to stress responses in the human spaceflight analog environments.Group social behaviors were measured with a Social Network Analysis (SNA) approach to define objective parameters associated with sociability and its plasticity by sex. This analytic approach may help identify a network of individuals who are more effective teammates or more likely to generate new social relationships. Data acquisition, biomarker assessment, and data quality control will continue through September 2022.

D F Dinges↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Exploration Measures Harmonized Across HERA, NEK, and ISS: Teams Risk

BACKGROUNDThe Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Exploration Measures (HFBP-EM) suite is a set of standardized measures to assess behavioral health and performance risk related to future exploration class missions, and to support reduction of the Human Research Program’s (HRP) Behavioral Medicine (BMed), Team, Sleep, and Human Systems Integration Architecture risks. HFBP-EM were collected during Human Exploration Research Analogs (HERA) campaigns 4 (C4) and 5 (C5), and during SIRIUS 17 and 19 missions in the Russian Ground Based Experiment Complex, NEK, to document the feasibility, flexibility, and acceptability of these measures in analogsof the spaceflight environment. A subset of the HFBP-EM suite was collected during spaceflight as part HRP’s Standard Measures in Spaceflight Project. Whenever possible, the HFBP-EM protocol and measures are kept the same across studies, however, differences across research settings (e.g., experimental manipulations, mission scenarios, mission length) and implementation of the measures require the data are harmonized to ensure comparable views across missions. The purpose of our project is to develop a harmonized database of HFBP-EM data from different settings, and to summarize the trajectory of behavioral health and performance within and between research settings. In this presentation, we will summarize the harmonized dataset and the trajectory of measures related to the Team Risk, including team performance, team cohesion, team processes, and psychological safety, over time and between and within settings.METHODSWe followed best practices for data harmonization. Characteristics of each research setting were assessed for harmonization potential, and we deemed NEK-SIRIUS 17 as inappropriate due to study aims, length, and data quality. Common variables of interest were identified. Study characteristics and key variables with which datafiles could be merged were defined as “meta-data.” HFBP-EM data from all settings were processed under a common format. We then created a harmonized team-level database designed to facilitate analyses that address HRP research gaps related to HRP’s Team risk. In this database, team cohesion, processes, performance, psychological safety, and group living were operationalized as the team mean of the crew responses for each data collection (e.g., on mission day 7). Data collected on the International Space Station (ISS) included a subset of scale items administered to participants. Data collected from ISS team members within +/- 7 days of the first data collection and every following 30 +/-4 days were aggregated to the team level. We generated figures that display the mean and variability of team constructs across research settings. We also generated plots of changes in team constructs with mission day and with percentage of the mission completed. Where possible, we compared data from spaceflight analogs with data from astronauts aboard the ISS. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONThe team-level harmonized database was structured such that each row represents data for a team on a specific mission day. Team constructs (e.g., team cohesion) were included as columns (i.e., wide format) with repeated measures across mission days given in rows (i.e., long format). The database included data from 18 crews: five, 4-person American crews in HERA C4, four 4-person American crews in HERA C5, one 6-person multinational crew in NEK-SIRIUS 19, and eight, 2–11-person multinational crews aboard the ISS. Results provide insights into mission and campaign differences in team functioning and performance. For example, between campaign differences were observed for team processes—the interdependent team actions that orchestrate taskwork in pursuit of the team’s goals [1]. Greater between-team variability on team processes was detected during HERA C4 than during C5, and a downward trend was observed over the duration of C4, but not C5 or SIRIUS 19. This may be due to the campaign-level differences such as the sleep deprivation implemented during C4. Responses on the subset of team process items administered on the ISS indicate between-crew variability more like those observed in C4 than C5 and NEK, with some, but not all ISS crews demonstrating a downward trend over time. Additional findings will be presented. REFERENCESMarks, M. A., et al (2001) Academy of Management Review, 26(3), 356-376.

S T Bell↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Exploration Measures Harmonized Across HERA, NEK, and ISS Teams Risk

The Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Exploration Measures (HFBP-EM) suite is a set of standardized measures to assess behavioral health and performance risk related to future exploration class missions, and to support reduction of the Human Research Program’s (HRP) Behavioral Medicine (BMed), Team, Sleep, and Human Systems Integration Architecture risks. HFBP-EM were collected during Human Exploration Research Analogs (HERA) campaigns 4 (C4) and 5 (C5), and during SIRIUS 17 and 19 missions in the Russian Ground Based Experiment Complex, NEK, to document the feasibility, flexibility, and acceptability of these measures in analogs of the spaceflight environment. A subset of the HFBP-EM suite was collected during spaceflight as part HRP’s Standard Measures in Spaceflight Project. Whenever possible, the HFBP-EM protocol and measures are kept the same across studies, however, differences across research settings (e.g., experimental manipulations, mission scenarios, mission length) and implementation of the measures require the data are harmonized to ensure comparable views across missions. The purpose of our project is to develop a harmonized database of HFBP-EM data from different settings, and to summarize the trajectory of behavioral health and performance within and between research settings. In this presentation, we will summarize the harmonized dataset and the trajectory of measures related to the Team Risk, including team performance, team cohesion, team processes, and psychological safety, over time and between and within settings.

S T Bell↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development and Initial Validation of HFBP-EM Short-Form Surveys

The Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Exploration Measures (HFBP-EM) suite includes self-report surveys designed to assess Behavioral Medicine (BMed) and Team risks for future exploration class missions. Survey data was collected during the Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) Campaign 4 (C4), HERA Campaign 5 (C5), and during SIRIUS19 missions in the Russian Ground Based Experiment Complex, NEK. Crew time in spaceflight analogs and in spaceflight is typically limited. Extensive self-report surveys can be a significant burden to participants and are not operationally acceptable for spaceflight. The purpose of this project was to comprehensively assess the reliability and validity of the standard-length HFBP-EM surveys, identify acceptable short forms to administer during HERA C6, examine initial validation evidence for the proposed short form measures, and identify key measurement gaps in HFBP-EM coverage. In this presentation, we will report reliability and validity metrics of standard form data, describe the proposed new short forms, and present initial psychometric analyses supporting the use of these short forms.

S T Bell↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

HUMAN FACTORS AND BEHAVIORAL PERFORMANCE EXPLORATION MEASURES: ASSESSING ASTRONAUT RISK

INTRODUCTION: The Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Exploration Measures (HFBP-EM) suite is a set of standardized measures to assess behavioral health and performance risk related to future exploration class missions, and to support reduction of the Human Research Program’s (HRP) Behavioral Medicine (BMed), Team, Sleep, and Human Systems Integration Architecture (HSIA) risks. This presentation will provide an overview of the HFBP-EM program, describe its implementation across spaceflight analogs and the international space station (ISS), and discuss its applicability to audience members. TOPIC: HFBP-EM is a research program designed to develop a standard set of measures that can be used in space and space-analog research to characterize BMed, Team, Sleep, and HSIA risks. It is an ongoing research project that is used examine the validity and reliability of HFBP measures, as well as their shorter forms. It also serves as a test bed for HFBP measures being considered for the spaceflight standard measures. The suite of measures is used to test the efficacy of countermeasures. To date, HFBP-EM has been collected in Human Exploration Research Analogs campaigns 4 and 5, and the SIRIUS 19 mission in the Russian Ground Based Experiment Complex. A subset of the HFBP-EM suite was collected during spaceflight as part of HRP’s Standard Measures in Spaceflight Project. Data was collected from a total of 55 multinational astronaut and astronaut-like crewmembers (mean age: 39.5, SD = 7.6; 31% female; 91% with advanced degrees). Three broad categories of HFBP-EM measures and their relevance to HRP risks will be discussed: 1) surveys that assess team functioning (Teams risk) as well as mood and affect (Bmed risk), 2) performance-based tasks of cognitive functioning and operationally relevant performance (Bmed risk), and 3) physiological biomarkers of sleep (sleep risk) and heart rate (Bmed risk). We will provide an overview of the background of the HFBP-EM program, what the suite currently includes, and next steps in its future development. We will also discuss the application to aerospace practitioners and researchers. APPLICATION: Astronaut teams selected for future space exploration missions will face several challenges that pose significant yet still unknown risks to the behavioral health and performance of astronauts. The HFBP-EM suite provides a comprehensive assessment of behavioral health and performance in space analog and spaceflight settings. This suite can be applied to both operational and research settings to advance risk reduction research for long duration space exploration missions.

S T Bell↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Behavioral Health Benefits of the ISS Pick-and-Eat Crop Growth System

Summary: We summarize findings related to assessing the pick-and-eat salad-crop productivity and acceptability of the ISS food system as a countermeasure to maintain behavioral health in long-duration spaceflight. BACKGROUND Plants are a potential countermeasure for the stresses of living in space. Caring for plants and eating fresh food have been shown to serve as a psychological benefit for previous astronauts and for others in analogous environments such as Antarctica [1,2]. Gardening can be therapeutic in terrestrial settings [3]. These effects may carry over or be more pronounced in austere environments such as spaceflight. It can reduce stress and increase sensory stimulation and enjoyment [2]. Growing crops may offer astronauts meaningful and engaging work as they care for living things in an austere environment away from Earth’s nature and as they provide sustenance for their crew. We examined the extent to which interacting with plants (e.g., tending to, consuming) was related to behavioral health outcomes in long-duration space missions. METHOD Participants were 27 astronauts that interacted with the plant system VEG-04, VEG-05, and HRF-VEG (VEG-03 I-L, PH-04). In total, there were 106 in-flight observations. Participants completed monthly measures of mood and well-being, enjoyment and time spent performing specific crop growth and consuming the plants, meaningfulness, performance, connections with others and the Earth, desire to work with and eat plants, and experiences with struggling or dying plants. Higher ends of the 7-point Likert scale indicated more positive outcomes, lower ends of the scale were anchored with more negative outcomes, and the scale midpoints indicated neutral positions. Participants selected a specific survey version based on whether they interacted with the plant system(s) or not, and we included only the scores from the crewmembers that participated in any given activity. RESULTS & DISCUSSION Results indicated that participants generally rated tasks related to the plants and crop growth as enjoyable. Consuming the harvested plants and voluntary viewing were the most enjoyable activities. Tending to the plants was reported as moderately enjoyable, indicating BHP benefits from this work task. The BHP impacts of whether the task was engaging, meaningful, supported well-being, or was demanding for a crewmember were generally positive and increased over time. As shown in the Figure, working with plants was reported as more engaging, meaningful, and beneficial to well-being over time, while the demand from the task was moderate to low and consistent over time. Engaging, meaningful, and supporting well-being were strongly, positively correlated with each other, which is consistent with research that suggests engaging and meaningful work can support well-being. Plant activities such as voluntary viewing, watering, harvesting, and consuming, were positively related to task engagement and meaning, and enjoyment and well-being. Findings suggest that working with plants and consuming them can be a behavioral health countermeasure for long-duration spaceflight. REFERENCES [1] Schlacht I, et al. (2020) Impact of plants in isolation: The EDEN-ISS…in Antarctica. In Advances in Human Factors of Transportation, Washington DC. [2] Vessel E, Russo S (2015) Effects of reduced sensory stimulation and…countermeasures…. NASA/TM-2015-218576. [3] Odeh R, Guy C (2017) Gardening for therapeutic people-plant interactions during LDSM. Open Agriculture, 2(1), 1-13. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research was supported by the Human Health and Performance Contract NNJ15HK11B, and NASA grant MTL #1075 (PI G.D. Massa).

behavioral health↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Risk Characterization Research for Artemis II: Human Factors and Behavioral Performance

BACKGROUND Artemis II will be the first time NASA astronauts go beyond low-Earth orbit (LEO) since the Apollo era, and the first astronauts heading into space in the Orion vehicle. As such, it provides a critical opportunity to refine our understanding of the likelihood and consequences associated with the Behavioral Medicine (BMed), Team, Human System Integration Architecture (HSIA), and Sleep Risks, and prepare for future Moon and Mars missions. However, Artemis II research efforts are uniquely shaped by in-mission data collection constraints. There is currently no in-mission crew time available to complete measures. In-mission data will need to be collected unobtrusively from available data streams (e.g., audiovisual, existing records such as schedules, and actigraphy). Accordingly, the overarching goal of our research is to utilize Artemis II data to further define the likelihood and consequences of these risks, and to create an unobtrusive research infrastructure that can be expanded to include future Artemis missions. This goal spans four aims across three research phases: (1) identify and operationally define key performances metrics and constructs across the four aforementioned risks, (2) develop an unobtrusive methodology and coding scheme for in-mission data collection, (3) characterize performance decrements due to Bmed, Team, HSIA, and Sleep Risks, and (4) develop a data infrastructure for future Artemis missions. The following details results of Phase I efforts in which we address Aims 1 and 2 to develop an unobtrusive measurement plan and coding scheme to capture key constructs, contributing factors, and performance decrements across each risk area. METHOD As part of Phase I, we conducted an interdisciplinary literature review and consulted with SMEs to identify unobtrusive methodologies that leverage text, audio, and/or video data as well as conceptualize key performance metrics, contributing factors, and BMed, Team, HSIA, and Sleep risk constructs related to performance decrements. The Phase I effort resulted in a finalized pre- and post-mission protocol for Artemis II, along with a measurement and coding scheme for in-mission Artemis II data. Phase II will involve data collection from the upcoming Artemis II mission. Phase III will include data processing, coding, depiction, analysis, and report writing of the Artemis II data. RESULTS & DISCUSSION To date, we have completed Phase I efforts. Specifically, we identified BMed, Team, HSIA, and Sleep risk constructs related to performance metrics, summarized how these constructs can be measured using audiovisual data collected during the mission, and worked with NASA’s HFBP Element to finalize a data collection protocol that leverages audiovisual input from the Orion spacecraft system. Our protocol includes novel unobtrusive methodologies that adhere to in-mission data streams and subsequent constraints (e.g., limited storage space on GoPro cameras, ambient noise impeding audio files) to best capture in-mission phenomena across each risk area. We will present our results from Phase I efforts, namely best practices for unobtrusive measurement as identified through literature reviews and SME consultation as well as codebook excerpts for use in Artemis II. We will include a description of planned work as we prepare for Phase II and Phase III of this research plan and the Artemis II mission itself. SUMMARY We describe progress on our Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Research for Artemis II study.

behavioral health↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Results for the Subjective Habitability Acceptability Questionnaire From HERA C5 and C6

BACKGROUND The impact of habitability on psychological and performance outcomes is recognized as an important factor in habitat and vehicle design—especially as missions increase in length. Formal evaluation of habitability’s impact is possible using the Spaceflight Habitability Acceptability Questionnaire (SHAQ), which was psychometrically validated by Roma et al. in 2022 [1]. The SHAQ survey systematically quantifies the relationships between habitat areas (e.g., bedroom, kitchen, hygiene area, office, etc.) and behavioral health and performance (BHP) outcomes (i.e., individual and team performance, mood, stress, sleep, social interaction), and considers the moderating effects of key habitability aspects (i.e., privacy, control, convenience, efficiency, comfort, social density) on that relationship. METHOD Respondents were HERA participants from Campaign 5 and 6 (n = 32). Data from three environments were used in our SHAQ analyses: SHAQ in HERA (in-mission), SHAQ at Home (pre-mission), and SHAQ in Hotel (pre- and post-mission for C6, just pre-mission for C5). For each habitat area, respondents are asked how that area layout impacts six BHP outcomes on a 201-point visual analog scale with the anchors: impairs, has no effect, and facilitates. They also had the option to respond “Not Applicable”. Follow up questions asked why six key habitability aspects (e.g., privacy) influenced the way the habitat area affected a given outcome. Participants indicated whether a habitat area’s habitability aspects were inadequate (low score) to adequate (midpoint) to ideal (high score), using a 201-point visual analog scale as well but were binned to a 7-point scale for analyses. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION When comparing across environments, ratings of BHP outcomes were worse in HERA compared to home and pre-mission hotel, but rebounded for the post-mission hotel such that post-mission hotel rating were often higher than all previous ratings. Within HERA, ratings of how a habitat area impacted an outcome skewed towards facilitation with communal areas (i.e., galley and office) rated most facilitating. The follow up questions about why six key aspects related to habitability moderated outcomes indicated that most habitat areas were rated as having “adequate” habitability characteristics. Privacy was the only moderator with average scores below adequate for all habitat areas. The office had the most moderators scoring above adequate for all habitat areas. Ratings indicated small to moderate effects of layouts on BHP outcomes: with facilitating layouts averaging between 4 and 5, and impairing layouts averaging between 2 and 4. The sleeping module layout facilitated sleep, with ratings indicating adequate comfort but inadequate privacy. The galley layout facilitated social interaction and mood, with ratings indicating adequate efficiency and convenience. The office layout facilitated social interaction, team and individual performance, with ratings similarly indicating adequate efficiency and convenience. The hygiene module worsened individual performance, mood and stress, with ratings indicating less than adequate privacy and social density. Our findings suggest there is value in having dedicated team and individual spaces. REFERENCES [1] Roma, P. G., Landon, L.B., Spencer, C. A., Whitmire, A. M., & Williams, T. J. (2022). SHAQ: Development and Validation. Human Factors: Special Issue on Spaceflight, 65(6), 1074-1104. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project was funded by the NASA Human Research Program directed task Human Factors and Behavioral Performance in HERA (PI = S. Bell) to the BHP Lab. KBR Inc. and JES Tech authors were supported by KBR’s Human Health and Performance Contract NNJ15HK11B with NASA.

behavioral health↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Communication Delays in Cislunar Space: A Lab Study Examining Human System Integration Architecture (HSIA) and Team Risk Concerns

BACKGROUND: Communication delays are an inherent challenge of space missions to the Moon and beyond. Past research studies showed that 50+ second delays adversely affected individual well-being, team cohesion, and overall task performance (Kintz et al., 2016; Larson et al., 2019). However, there is a dearth of research on the effects of shorter delays (on the order of 4-12 seconds one-way) that may present a more immediate challenge during the upcoming Artemis missions. Even these shorter delays could make it difficult or infeasible for ground control to provide real-time support to Artemis astronauts, especially in complex and time-critical tasks such as extra-vehicular activities (EVAs). Results from studies on longer or Mars-like delays cannot be directly applied to Artemis-like delays, due to the large differences in delay magnitude and task types between these mission categories. For example, real-time oversight and guidance from ground control is impossible under Mars-like delays but may be performed under Artemis-like delays, albeit with potentially high workload and communication difficulty. Thus, a better understanding of the effects of Artemis-like communication delays on collaborative task performance is needed. Additionally, there is a need to develop reliable task paradigms that can be used in future studies on communication delays. METHODS: This project will study the effects of Artemis-like communication delays on collaborative task performance in a simulated space-to-ground team task via a lunar Gateway-like interface prototype. Teams of two astronaut-like participants - one serving as “crewmember” and one as “flight controller” - will perform a spaceflight-relevant task under six delay conditions (i.e., 0, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 seconds). Audio, video, texting, and file transfer will be delayed between the participants to mimic lunar-like communication delays. Measures related to workload, situation awareness, system usability, task performance, team cohesion, well-being, and communication strategies will be collected. These measures will be compared across delay levels, participant roles, and off-nominal and nominal tasks. Participants will be given the choice to use any combination of video and text communication in order to study preferences in interaction modality. RESEARCH AIMS: One aim is to identify a delay level or range of levels at which there may be significant decrements in individual and team-based measures. Identifying such ranges may help design novel workload management or communication countermeasures for future space missions. Also, the spaceflight-relevant research tasks and corresponding communication delay technology developed as part of this effort may be used for future studies on communication delays. Results from this work are also expected to inform study scenarios in the Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) Campaign.

S Upasani↗