교양대학 데이비드 윌리엄 김(David William Kim)교수는 영국 왕립역사학회(The Royal Historical Society, UK) 석학회원이고 오스트레일리아 ANU-InSpace Mission Specialist로 활동하고 있는 가운데 우주과학과 인문융합분야 (Space Science and Humanities Integrated Section) 한국연구재단 장기프로잭 일환 (2022-2025)으로 화성탐사 프로잭에서 아직 미제로 남아있는 Human Research Programs (HRP)에 연관된 미래 화성우주인 (2033) 선발기준에 대한 새로운 연구를 미국 하버드대학교와 NASA 휴스톤 방문연구로 그 성과를 이루어 space medicine, human factor, astrobiology, astrophysics, life science, space politics, security, space exploration, space wellbeing 분야 학자들 가운데 개척자적인 연구로 인정받아 이번에 유럽 SCIE저어널에 출판하게 되었다. 아래는 원문 (Astronaut Selection and Potential Risk Management: Psychological Trauma and Resilience for Mars Space Mission) 일부를 간략하게 소개하고 있다.
As human spaceflight became a reality, Yuri Garin of the Soviet Union and Alan Shepard of the USA became the first astronauts in the early 1960s (Burgess 2016). Once the scientists and engineers had developed the necessary launch facilities, the questions of who should fly and how do we know arose. In the early stages of space exploration, there were numerous risks associated with manned spaceflight, such as equipment malfunction, turbulence, impact forces during launch and re-entry, physiological impact of microgravity, psychological effects of isolation and confinement, fire and explosions, radiation exposure, temperature fluctuations, rapid and/ or explosive decompression of spacecraft, emergency egress, and crashes due to pilot error (Seedhouse 2010, 3). For the Mercury project, many experienced pilots under 40 with excellent physical condition and shorter than 180cm were considered (Burgess 2016, 50–57). They were required to have at least a bachelor’s degree or equivalent, a test pilot school graduation, and 1,500 hours of total flying time. Moreover, jet pilot qualifications were also necessary (Seedhouse 2010, 5). Thirteen female pilots passed the tests but were only enrolled in an ‘unofficial’ astronaut training programme (Seedhouse 2010, 7).
However, is the current short-term mission policy suitable for deep space travel conditions? If not, how can it be improved to ensure the safety of the space community? While no single method can perfectly monitor astronauts’ psychological well-being, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) assessment holds promise for predicting individual personality types, strengths, and preferences (Fetvadjiev and van de Vijver 2015, 752–776). This self-report inventory of internal consistency consists of four dichotomous scales: Introversion/Extroversion (IE), Thinking/Feeling (TF), Sensing/iNtuition (SN), and Judgment/Perception (JP). While the MBTI, in conjunction with Carl Jung’s four temperaments, may not be considered a strictly scientific theory, it efficiently identifies “individuals 16 personality characteristics not only to professionals, but also to the individuals themselves” (Coulacoglou and Saklofske 2017, 267)…
Although the TF dimension has been criticised as “not sufficiently pure”, L. Bastiaansen, G. Rossi, and C. Schotte suggest that the MBTI aligns with NEO-PI’s Big Five personality traits, which are linked to personality disorders (Bastiaansen et al. 2011, 378–396; Samuel and Widiger 2008, 1326–1342). David S Janowsky, Shirley Morter, and Liyi Hong further assert that the MBTI’s profiles can also encompass dark-side traits (Janowsky et al. 2002, 33–9).
The environment faced by deep space astronauts would be challenging and demanding, with various risk levels. Selim Aren and Hatice Nayman Hamamci define this as ‘risk aversion behaviour’ (Aren and Hamamci 2020, 2651). The way an individual interacts, reacts, and behaves with their colleagues is something that can be ambiguous to measure, especially in emergencies. For example, Psychometric Personality Differences Between Candidates in Astronaut Selection (a research paper) shows that “the candidates who failed in basic aptitude testing showed higher levels of neuroticism than those who passed that phrase” (Mittelstädt et al. 2016, 933). Therefore, risk-taking behaviour should be considered a key factor in the astronaut selection process for a successful Mars mission…
This paper argued a hypothetical theory suggesting that the non-scientific sphere of the human mind can display high levels of resilience if space policy selection criteria considers the gravity of mental traumas in the context of risk management and space community safety. It advocates for a thorough reevaluation of candidates during the astronaut selection procedure, emphasising the importance of taking into account past mental traumas, even among physically qualitied individuals with suitable education, experiences, and backgrounds. Specifically, candidates who have experienced family-related traumas such as bereavement (loss of father, mother, grandparents, husband, wife, brother, sister, son, daughter, and other close relatives), divorce, or instances of abuse (including sexual abuse) within the past year should undergo careful scrutiny. Additionally, experiences with addiction, such as drugs, alcohol, smoking, internet gambling (games), and sex, should be subject to thorough examination.
To assess future astronaut’s resilience, the paper proposes using the MBTI psychological assessment method to evaluate their personality traits, including those of mission commanders/pilots, payload specialists, and mission specialists. While MBTI does not provide precise mathematical or scientific data, it offers valuable insights into each candidate’s invisible character trait, which are crucial not only for routine operations but also for navigating unexpected crises… Thus, whether for a short-duration (570 days) or long-duration (950 days) mission to Mars in the 2030s, it will not be without challenges. While the astronaut selection procedure cannot guarantee perfection, it at least mitigates predicted risk factors related to human resilience and well-being, directly impacting the mission’s security and success.
For further research, see: https://kirj.ee/trames-publications/?filter[year]=2024&filter[issue]=1808&v=38dd815e66db
