The TEKTITE II Human Behavior Program

Abstract

The habitst provides a relatively stable and constant environment. Unlike many field situations, all subjects could be observed under the same living conditions. This enable* statistical comparison across individuals and across team.3. The design of the habitat provides excellent audio and video coverage. Observers couid monitor almost all in-habitat activity.4. An ertensive battery of psychological data could be obtained on each Aquanaut prior to his miseion--an tmusual situation in field research. 5.The nAtural situation provided excellent objective criteria of performance ad vdJustment. These variables fora the criteria for prediction of individual reactions and the study of trends in behavior over time. Between four and six * thousand observations (depending on mission length) were taken on each of the criterion variables on each Aquanaut.Offsetting some of the desirable characteristics noted above are several disadvantages. The number of subjects (48) and missions (10) is relati ely small. A larger sample with more replications would give broader and more stable data. HUMAN BEHAVIOR PROGRAM page 3The TEKTITE habitat was fairly shallow and was located in warm, clear water; as a result, the stress levels were less extreme than those found in projects such as SEALAB II and III. The shallow depth also made it more difficult to maintain isolation. A larger sample of female Aquanauts and mized crews would have enabled better evaluation of the obtained results. Only additional research will show how veil the findings based on this sample of volunteer scientists and engineers will generalize to other situations and populations.Overall, however, the advantages clearly seem to outveigh the limitations of such research and the methodology developed should be applicable to many settings.Scope of the Report. Time and space limitations make it impossible to present more than a fraction of the data in this report. The concentrations here will be on a general description of some of the major findings. The areas to be emphasized will be (1) overall behavior in the habitat, (2) team and individual differences in reactions, (3) trends in behavior over time, (4) cr'ew composition and (5) prediction of behavior.Topics for Subsequent Analysis. It may be useful to list here aspects of the data which will be the subject of later analyses and will be reported in more detailed technical reports. II. Methodology James H. LeFan and Robert HelmreichThe University of Texas at AustinDate collection was conducted in four ways: (1) pre.-mission testing; (2) contit -ous observation of in-habitat behavior; (3) self-report questionnaires filled out dii]y by Aquanauts during their dive; and (4) structured debriefing of Aquanauts iLediately after decompression.Pre-Mission Testing. After arrival at the base camp, each Aquanaut was given a complete briefing on the scope and goals of the Behavior Program. The nature of data to .e collected and provisions to ensure the confidentiality of all responses were explained. Following the briefing, each A...

The Life History Questionnaire as a predictor of performance in Navy diver training.

“…The relationship between health and criteria, although nonsignificant, is in a counterintuitive direction and replicates a finding obtained with Scientist-Aquanauts during Project TEKTITE 2 (Helmreich, 1971). This is a tendency for successful performers to have experienced considerable restriction because of illness or accident.…”

“…Birth order was significantly related to the pass-fail criterion with primogeniture associated with success (also replicating the effect found among Aquanauts; Helmreich, 1971).…”

“…The first applications of LHQ derived predictors to behavioral criteria were highly successful and have been reported elsewhere for Aquanauts (Helmreich, 1971) and Navy divers (Radloff, 1971). In the present article, we will present an application of the data available from the LHQ to prediction of completion and relative standing in two demanding military schools training Navy divers, second class.…”

Applying psychology in outer space: Unfilled promises revisited.

“…NASA has, however, funded a number of analog and simulation studies relevant to spaceflight, some of them quite extensive. These have included research in submersibles such as the Ben Franklin (Seitz et al, 1970), and the Tektite undersea habitat, where aquanauts were systematically observed during a 7-month operational period (Deutsch, 1971;Helmreich, 1971;Nowlis, 1972). Psychological aspects of isolation and confinement have also been examined in volunteer subjects observed in laboratory settings, as in the large projects of Brady and Emurian (1978) and Rogers (Note 2).…”