Psychology keeps astronauts well grounded

It sounds so exciting: An astronaut gets the chance to view the heavens while soaring through space on a mission. But the trip can also be lonely, difficult and stressful. An astronaut, after all, can be away from home for weeks or months or (if a mission to Mars materializes) even years, with comforts like long, hot showers and freshly prepared foods a distant memory.

What determines an astronaut?s ability to thrive under these conditions isn?t just personality. According to psychologist Al Holland, PhD, success is also determined by the organizational policies NASA puts in place before an astronaut ever leaves the ground.

Holland, chief of psychology in NASA?s Medical Operations Branch, is involved in selecting astronauts, helping train them for long flights, debriefing them afterward and providing psychological services on issues that arise during flights.

He and other psychologists are trying to determine all the factors that affect the psychological well-being of astronauts on long-duration space flight by studying astronauts spending time on Russia?s Mir space station, Australian workers in Antarctica and people involved in laboratory simulations of space flight.

Organizational psychology

Holland?s studies of astronauts? experiences on long duration flights show that ?we tend to focus too much on the individual level and too little on the organization level,? he says.

Actions taken by ground control and management, says Holland, affect mental health and well-being as much as, or more than, the individual?s psychological makeup or the space environment. For instance, he says, problems can arise when ground control sends up wrong procedures or confusing messages to astronauts on completing an experiment or repairing a piece of equipment. ?If these procedures are not clear or are erroneous,? he says, ?they?re really frustrating to the crew member, who is already dealing with adapting to the environment?[T]hen you get tension between ground and crew.?

Decisions on training?where crews will train preflight, for how long and whether their families will be with them?are an example of how an organizational decision affects psychological health. ?We really need to pay attention to how long astronauts are away from their families and how much support we give them when they?re away,? Holland says. These factors, he says, ?affect fliers more than the rigors of the actual flights.?

Preparing for the future

Holland?s conclusions on the importance of organizational policies are likely to have increasing practical relevance in coming years as international space cooperation brings NASA and its counterparts in other countries together on various ventures.

For the past two years, the United States has participated in activities on Russia?s Mir space station. Next summer, the first launch is scheduled for construction of an International Space Station that will be built by 15 nations. During construction, astronauts will stay in space for three to six months at a time.

The station, says Holland, poses ?a huge challenge to coordinate the decision-making and policy formulation between NASA and these other agencies in a way that the astronauts? psychological well-being is protected.?

Mistakes have been made?and learned from. For example, during the first American Mir flight, says Holland, Russian organizations did not fulfill an agreement to provide American astronaut Norman Thagard with a certain amount of U.S. news and communications every week. The result was that a link in Thagard?s psychological support system?news from home?was missing. Thagard didn?t get news because at that time Russia had several competing space agencies rather than one, as in the United States. ?The organization that owned the space station would not allow the contract to be implemented, because they were in competition with the group with which we made the agreement,? explains Holland.

Since then, the Russians have made great strides in bringing their agencies together and now ensure that written agreements will be implemented, says Holland. ?But the same issue will raise itself for the International Space Station. More attention must be paid to organizational processes and the integration of common policies across space agencies if we?re going to positively impact the psychological well-being of the individual flier.?

Studies in the works

Two studies now being conducted?one involving Antarctic missions and another in a test chamber at NASA?s Johnson Space Center?are expected to shed led light on the role of organizational, personality and other factors in determining astronauts? experiences on long-duration flights.

Psychologist Joanna Wood, PhD, a senior scientist with KRUG Life Sciences, a NASA contractor, has been studying Australian-sponsored Antarctic missions for NASA since 1993.

The Australian government sends scientists and support personnel to Antarctica on missions that include up to 20 people and stretch up to nine months over the long winter. Wood administers computerized questionnaires twice a week to several mission members. So far she has received data from more than 100 people.

There are some differences from space flights, Wood says, ?because when you?re up in space you?re perhaps more vulnerable than when you?re on the ground, but I don?t think the psychological responses to most of these things are all that different.?

Like Holland, Wood has seen the importance of organizational actions. ?One of the big complaints I?ve heard through the years is that people feel abandoned by their home organizations if they don?t hear from them on a regular basis,? says Wood. ?They feel forgotten.?

But the biggest problems are interpersonal, she adds. ?After a few months, you get tired of look-ing at the same faces. People fre-quently have behaviors that might be endearing in the larger society, but when you?re living with it day after day it?s an annoyance.?

While an outsider might think stress is a constant, that?s not necessarily the case, says Wood. ?There are intense moments, there are intense activities, but much of the time, if they?re not in any danger, it can be a relatively stress-free environment because you don?t have as many social and financial demands.?

Depression, Wood says, is not common. ?Less than a third of the people reported such symptoms at all in one year?s data that I looked at,? she says. ?Very few individuals reported it on a regular basis.?

One key to how well people do is whether they have realistic ex-pectations, Wood says. ?If people go expecting there?s never going to be any problems, they?re going to be sorely disappointed,? she says. ?If you go expecting that work may not always go smooth-ly, but that you will overcome the problems, you probably will.?

Both Holland and Wood are involved in NASA?s test-chamber experiment, known formally as the Lunar-Mars Life Support Test Project. In the most recent phase of the experiment, a crew of four was maintained in a three-floor airtight chamber environment for 91 days to test life-support systems for future space exploration, such as a mission to Mars. The test used a combination of physical, mechanical and biological methods for air and water recycling, which is essential for a trip to Mars or a lunar base because astronauts will not be able to carry the supplies necessary on those flights. Holland, who has helped select astronauts for years by administering psychological tests and conducting interviews, helped pick participants in the air-chamber experiment. One innovation he devised was to select eight people for the prime and backup crews, train them together and then let the eight be involved in choosing the four-member prime crew.

Training everyone together, he says, proved beneficial when the prime crew commander developed a medical problem and one of the backup members had to replace him. And peer selection helped choose a prime crew that functioned together effectively.

Years of working with astronauts and potential astronauts, in providing services as well as in selection, have convinced Holland that while psychological help is important, it should not be overbearing.

?You don?t want a crew member or a team dependent on the psychologists,? he says. ?You want an independent individual. You also don?t want to be intrusive into that individual?s life or into the crew?s activities. You need to strike a balance where you are involved with the crew to an extent that you?re helpful and then you stay out of their way.?

Peter Freiberg is a writer in Miami Beach, Fla.