Engineering Papers⌕ Search

Engineering topics

S T Bell

Publications and source records attributed to S T Bell.

At least 19 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

Identifying Cognitive Capabilities Required for Optimal Exploration EVA Performance: A Cognitive Task Analysis

BACKGROUND Extravehicular activity (EVA) is one of the most dangerous and cognitively demanding actions that astronauts can execute, and the cognitive demands associated with future exploration EVA on the Moon and Mars are expected to be higher compared to EVA currently conducted from the International Space Station (ISS). Decrements in cognitive performance present an important risk to crew safety during exploration mission class EVA. Yet there is currently insufficient characterization of the cognitive capabilities required prior to, during, and following EVA. Furthermore, it is unclear which cognitive domains are most important for conducting mission critical decisions with crew safety implications. To address this gap, we conducted a cognitive task analysis of exploration EVA to characterize the cognitive capabilities, critical safety decisions, and contributing factors (e.g., lunar communications delay) important to monitor for optimal performance in future exploration EVA. This cognitive task analysis was conducted through interviews with astronauts and subject matter experts in EVA research and operations. Interviews focused on exploration EVA and elicited feedback on the cognitive capabilities required for specific EVA tasks and subtasks. The information from this cognitive task analysis will help close the gap in our understanding of the key cognitive capabilities required for safe decision-making during exploration mission class EVA on the Moon and Mars. METHOD We used an applied cognitive task analysis method1 over the course of interviews with a total of 15 NASA astronauts and subject matter experts in EVA. Each interview was led by a scientist with expertise in cognitive neuroscience from the Behavioral Health & Performance (BHP) Laboratory at NASA Johnson Space Center. Notes were taken by a research coordinator in the BHP Laboratory and interviews were recorded on Microsoft Teams to ensure the accuracy of notetaking. In the first interview protocol, participants were asked about the specific tasks and cognitive demands associated with EVA. This provided a high-level overview of the steps involved in the major tasks conducted during exploration EVA, as well as which of the steps require the most cognitive skill. Next, participants completed a knowledge audit, which employs a set of probes designed to describe types of domain knowledge of skill and elicit appropriate examples. In the second interview protocol, completed with a separate set of subject matter experts, interviewees were asked to complete a simulated incapacitated crew rescue (ICR) scenario2, which provided specific context that allowed probing around relevant issues such as situational awareness and potential errors. Experts were then asked to identify the knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) underlying each EVA task and to provide ratings on the importance and cognitive demand of each KSA. Finally, participants also described the most likely and consequential critical safety incidents related to decrements in cognitive performance during exploration EVA and assessed the impact of lunar communication delay on cognitive performance. RESULTS & DISCUSSION Interviews for this cognitive task analysis are nearly complete and results will be presented in full at IWS 2025. Results will include a summary of all expert ratings of EVA tasks and subtasks, qualitative summaries of content from each interview part, and a discussion of future directions for products addressing cognitive performance monitoring and cognitive domain mapping in exploration EVA.

S R Anderson↗
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

Standard Measures During Spaceflight

The key goal of the Spaceflight Standard Measures project is to ensure that a set of measures, representing the Human Research Program’s key risks and acquired with minimal impact on time and resources, is consistently captured from crewmembers through the end of the International Space Station (ISS) Program. Data collected under the Spaceflight Standard Measures project include assessments of sleep/wake cycles, cognition, immune status and function, general blood and urine chemistry (urine is collected only before flight and after landing), microbiome composition (gastrointestinal tract, saliva, and body surface), cardiovascular structure and function (carotid intima-media thickness, orthostatic responses), sensorimotor function, and team processes. Data is collected once or twice before the flight (180 and 90 days before launch), twice during the 6-month missions (fight day 30 and 30 days before return to Earth) with the exception of actigraphy, which is recorded continuously during the mission, and during two-week periods before and after the mission. In this presentation, we will review the data collected to date on twelve ISS crew members. These data are placed in the NASA Life Sciences Data Archive and are available for occupational surveillance (using non-identifiable data) Institutional Review Board-approved data sharing requests, and retrospective data requests. This data repository enables high-level monitoring of the effectiveness of countermeasures and meaningful interpretation of health and performance outcomes for various mission durations. The knowledge gained from this project informs and supports future hypothesis-driven research that will enable the success of planetary missions.

G R Clement↗
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

A Process Model of Interpersonal Relationship Formation in Isolated and Confined Environments

Future space crews will face several challenges such as living and working in a confined environment, isolated from others. These circumstances increase the importance of interpersonal compatibility, teamwork, and team performance. The interpersonal compatibility of space crews has been and continues to be of interest to both NASA and the Institute of Biomedical Problems (IBMP), whose research informs operations for Roscosmos. In NASA-sponsored research, interpersonal compatibility has been examined in terms of how the combination of team members’ personality traits, values, and demographics shape team member relationships and team performance overtime. IBMP-sponsored research mostly has moved away from trait-based approaches toward an idiographic (in-depth, heavily descriptive) approach to researching crew interpersonal relations. This research uses software such as Personal Self-Perception and Attitudes (PSPA), network approaches to team member relations, and content analysis of interactions to assess interpersonal compatibility, and infer states and team dynamics. Our research program integrated these ideas. Our primary research aim was to develop and empirically test a process model of interpersonal relationship formation in isolated and confinement environments. We created a model, collected data from teams in an isolated and confined environment, and applied a novel analytical strategy that combines trait, state, and interaction data (i.e., relational events). We focused specifically on the formation of strained relationships in isolation and confinement—or with whom fellow crewmembers find it difficult to work.

S T Bell↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

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

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. The HFBP-EM addresses 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 Analog (HERA) campaigns 4 and 5, 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 spaceflight environments. A subset of the HFBP-EM suite was collected in spaceflight as part of the HRP Standard Measures in Spaceflight Project. Whenever possible, the HFBP-EM protocol and measures are the same across studies, differences across research settings (e.g., experimental manipulations, mission scenarios, and mission length) and implementation of the measures require that the data are harmonized to ensure comparable views across missions. The purpose of our project was to develop a harmonized database of analyzable HFBP-EM data from spaceflight and analog settings, and to summarize the trajectory of behavioral health and performance outcomes within and between mission settings. In this presentation, we will summarize the harmonized dataset and the trajectory of BMed related measures including depression, neurobehavioral function, mood, cognition, and operationally relevant individual performance over time and by campaign and mission.

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

The Impact of Mood and Affect on Operationally Relevant Performance Among Astronaut-Like Individuals in Space Analog Settings

Crewmembers of future space exploration missions will face many challenges associated with living and working in extreme conditions for prolonged periods of time. Thus, it is imperative to understand how spaceflight hazards impact mood and affect, cognitive functioning, and ultimately, operational performance. The Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Exploration Measures (HFBP-EM) suite is a set of standardized measures used to assess behavioral health and performance related to future exploration class space missions. HFBP-EM includes the Profile of Mood States (POMS) as a self-report measure of psychological distress, and the Robotic On-Board Trainer (ROBoT) as an operationally relevant task that simulates the capture and grappling maneuvers required to operate the Canadarm2 on the International Space Station. Although previous space analog studies have demonstrated fluctuations in mood and affect ratings assessed by the POMS (Basner, 2014), no studies to date have examined impacts on operationally relevant tasks. Here we investigate the relationship between POMS ratings and performance on the ROBoT task in space analog settings.

S I Dev↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Standard Measures During Spaceflight

The goal of the Spaceflight Standard Measures project is to ensure that a set of measures, representing the Human Research Program’s key risks and acquired with minimal impact on time and resources, is consistently captured from crewmembers through the end of the International Space Station (ISS) Program. Data collected under the Spaceflight Standard Measures project include assessments of sleep/wake cycles, cognition, immune status and function, general blood and urine chemistry (urine is collected only before flight and after landing), microbiome composition (gastrointestinal tract, saliva, and body surface), cardiovascular structure and function (carotid intima-media thickness, orthostatic responses), sensorimotor function, sleep quality, and team processes. Data is collected once or twice before the flight (180 and 90 days before launch), twice during the 6-month missions (flight day 30 and 30 days before return to Earth) with the exception of actigraphy, which is recorded during two-week periods before, during, and after the mission. In this presentation, we will review the data collected to date on 31 ISS crewmembers. These data are placed in the NASA Life Sciences Portal (NLSP) and are available for occupational surveillance (using non-identifiable data), Institutional Review Board-approved data sharing requests, and retrospective data requests. This data repository enables high-level monitoring of the effectiveness of countermeasures and meaningful interpretation of health and performance outcomes for various mission durations. The knowledge gained from this project informs and supports future hypothesis-driven research that will enable the success of planetary missions.

G R Clement↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Development and Application of Cognitive Performance Assessment for Exploration Class Mission EVAs

The objectives of our research are to: 1) Define cognitive performance requirements for future Lunar and Mars mission EVAs, 2) Characterize cognitive performance in subjects conducting simulated EVAs in analog studies, and 3) Develop and test unobtrusive EVA cognitive performance metrics. Our long-term goal is to develop exploration class cognitive performance monitoring capabilities for EVA and to provide data that can inform EVA planning for Lunar and Mars missions.

S R Anderson↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Cognition Battery: Developing a Normative Database for Spaceflight and Examining the Impact of Prolonged Isolation and Confinement on Cognitive Performance

INTRODUCTION: Astronauts on future long duration space exploration will be required to execute complex tasks in which even minor errors could have devastating consequences. Intact cognition is critical to maintain exceptional performance standards and it is possible that variability even at the highest ends of the performance spectrum will impact operational tasks. Exposure to spaceflight hazards could compromise cognitive performance, and decrements have been documented under conditions of altered gravity and radiation exposure. The cognitive impacts of prolonged isolation and confinement remain relatively unknown. Traditional neuropsychological assessments cannot support earth independent monitoring, do not have normative comparisons for high functioning individuals, and most are not sensitive enough to detect small performance decrements. The Cognition Battery was developed to address these limitations but currently lacks comprehensive normative data. In this project, we aimed to 1) develop a preliminary normative database for astronauts and astronaut surrogates using the Cognition Battery, and 2) characterize differences in cognitive performance after short and long duration analog missions. PARTICIPANTS & METHODS: We assessed baseline cognitive performance by administering the Cognition Battery to 97 astronaut and astronaut surrogates recruited to approximate astronaut demographics (mean age: 39.38, SD=7.62; 35.1% female; 91.7% advanced degrees). For aim 1, we calculated speed and accuracy outcomes for each subtest and summarized the data with descriptive statistics. We examined the relationship between age and performance with Pearsons’s correlations and the relationship between gender and performance with independent samples t-tests. A subset of individuals on short duration (n=48; mean age: 38.18, SD=7.14; 37.5% female; 91.7% advanced degrees) missions of 45 days and long duration (n=34; mean age: 42.12, SD=8.39; 38.2% female; 94.1% advanced degrees) missions ranging from 4-8 months were administered the Cognition Battery during and after their respective missions. For aim 2, we accounted for practice effects using published corrections, and z-transformed post-mission scores using the full sample’s baseline scores. One-way analysis of covariance tests determined the main effect of analog duration on post-mission performance, after accounting for age and gender. The False Discovery Rate method was applied to adjust for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: In the full normative sample, older age was associated with slower reaction times on a processing speed task (r=.39, p=.02), and men were more accurate on processing speed (t=-2.19, p=.03) and faster on sustained attention (t=2.02, p=.049) and risk-taking tasks (t=2.49, p=.02). We observed a main effect of duration on performance on tasks of visual memory (f(1)=5.62, p=.04), processing speed (f(1)=5.48, p=.03), and sensorimotor functioning (f(1)=39.52, p < .001), such that slower performance was observed after long duration missions relative to short. Only sensorimotor functioning was significant after adjustments for multiple comparisons (adjusted p<.001). DISCUSSION: The full sample represents the largest dataset of cognitive performance assessed by the Cognition Battery available and can be used for further research in spaceflight and high-performance populations. Relationships between performance and key demographic variables suggest future research that include age and gender stratification is needed. Our results also show minimal changes in cognitive performance between longer and shorter periods of isolation and confinement.

S I Dev↗