Managing Negative Interactions in Space Crews: The Role of Simulator ResearchThe moment our experimental team knew for certain that we had been success-
ful in creating a realistic spaceflight simulation occurred soon after the first group of
participants was established in “orbit.” The crewmembers were at their control sta-
tions and communicating with “Mission Control.” The passengers had unstrapped
from their bunks and were assembled in their seats facing forward toward the win-
dow area. Mission Control advised that they were preparing to remotely retract
the radiation shield over the window and that everyone would soon have a view of
Earth from space. By watching the changing postures of the participants, observ-
ers could easily see that tension was mounting during the 10-second countdown.
Suddenly, a view of Earth taken from one of the Shuttle flights filled the window
(actually a 27-inch television screen). One participant gasped and placed her hand
to her mouth while staring at the scene. Another whispered aloud in awe, “Ohhhh
myyy god.” Another, holding her hands to her cheeks said tearfully, “Ohhh, isn’t
that beautiful.” One of the men, gripping the sides of his chair, simply whispered,
“Wow!” Another said, “Jeez, look at that!”
There is no doubt that the confinement, training, spacecraft routine, etc., were
tolerated. All of the hourly questionnaires, the interaction measurements, and the
postflight behavior of the participants clearly suggest to the most casual observer
that the flight was not only tolerated but thoroughly enjoyed by the participants. It
lived up to their preflight hopes, according to postflight questionnaire reports and
their comments to us. Exit from the simulator was delayed in both flights because
the participants took the unplanned-for time to trade telephone numbers and
addresses before leaving. People who came to the experiment as strangers left as
friends. Participants’ moods during the simulated flights remained positive, and the
number of negative interactions in both groups was small. In the year following the
study, my lab received so many telephone calls from participants in both groups
requesting a reunion that we felt compelled to go back to McDonnell Douglas and
request that they sponsor such an event. They did, and it was a very well-attended,
robust party.
One might then wonder if perhaps the social situation produced happiness but
the space aspect of it was not important. What we learned is that the participants
returned home and presented themselves in their respective social groups as hav-
ing had a virtual trip to space of such realism that for all practical purposes, it might
as well have been real. They were now, in their respective social settings, authori-
ties on space travel. For months after the experiment, the lab kept receiving calls