Entertainment Computing in the Orbit

  • Matthias Rauterberg
  • Mark Neerincx
  • Karl Tuyls
  • Jack van Loon
Part of the IFIP International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT, volume 279)


During ultra long space missions (i.e. to Mars), the isolated space environmentaffects a number of physiological, psychosocial and mental processescritically involved in human performance, and it is vital to missions’ success tounderstand the psychological limits. Past experiences in space have shown that themental health of a crew can have a great effect on the success or failure of a mission.Latent and overt stress factors are mental strain, interpersonal problems, andlack of capability to rescue crew members, isolation, monotony, and tedium of lifeaboard an autonomous shuttle. Abstract__ These issues develop very slowly overtime and are very difficult to detect and remedy for observers on the ground. E.g.long-term isolation can lead to sleep deprivation, depression, irritability, anxiety,impaired cognition, and even hostility. Providing astronauts with entertainmentproducts can help to maintain the mental health of the crew. The results of thisproject will deepen the understanding of intra- and inter-individual crew behaviourand related performance, and provide the technical platform for a new type of crew assistance tools based on multi-user computer games.


astronaut space research entertainment game mental health 


  1. Bartle R A (1996). Hearts, clubs, diamonds, spades: Players who suit MUDs. Journal of MUD R e s e a r c h, vol. 1 ( 1 ) . Retrieved November 1 0 , 2 0 0 6 from Scholar
  2. Bonk C J and Dennen V P (2005). Massive multiplayer online gaming: a research framework for military training and education. ADL Technical Report 2005-1, US State Department of Defense.Google Scholar
  3. Christensen J M and Talbot J M (1986). A review of the psychological aspects of space flight. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine vol. 57(3), pp. 203-212.Google Scholar
  4. De Haan G, van der Mast C A P G, Blanson Henkemans O and Neerincx M A (2005). SuperAssist: Personal assistants for cooperative healthcare treatment. In: M Al-Akaidi and L Rothkrantz (eds.), Proceedings Euromedia 2005(pp. 124-128). Toulouse, France: EUROSIS.Google Scholar
  5. Driskell J E, Salas E and Johnston J (1999). Does stress lead to a loss of team perspective? Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, vol. 3(4), pp. 291-302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ellis S R (2000) Collision in space: human factors elements of the Mir Progress 234 collision. Ergonomics in Design, pp. 4-9.Google Scholar
  7. Endler N S (2004). The joint effects of person and situation factors on stress in spaceflight. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, vol. 75(7), pp. C22-C27.Google Scholar
  8. ESTEC (2001). HUMEX: Study on the survivability and adaptation of humans to long-duration interplanetary and planetary environments. HUMEX Technical Note 2(version 1), ESTEC/Contract No. 14056/99/NL/PA.Google Scholar
  9. Hexmoor H, Castelfranchi C and Falcone R (2008, forthcoming). A prospectus on agent autonomy. In: H Hexmoor and S Brainov (eds.), Agent Trust(in planning stage).Google Scholar
  10. Hexmoor H, Venkata S G and Hayes D (2006). Modelling social norms in multiagent systems. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, vol. 18(1), pp. 49-71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Johnson J C, Boster J S and Palinkas L A (2003). Social roles and the evolution of networks in extreme and isolated environments. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, vol. 27, pp. 89-121.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Kanas N (1985). Psychosocial factors affecting simulated and actual space missions. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, vol. 56, pp. 806-811.Google Scholar
  13. Kanas N (1987). Psychological and interpersonal issues in space. American Journal of Psychiatry, vol. 144(6), pp. 703-709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kanas N (1998). Psychiatric issues affecting long-duration space missions. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine vol. 69, pp. 1211-1216.Google Scholar
  15. Kanas N (2004). Group interactions during Space missions. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, vol. 75(1), pp. C3-C5.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. Lane H W and Feeback D L (2002). Habitability and environmental factors: the future of closedenvironment tests. In: H W Lane, R L Sauer and D L Feeback (eds.) ISOLATION: NASA experiments in closed environment living(pp. 419-432). San Diego, CA: American Astronautical Society.Google Scholar
  17. Manzey D (2004). Human missions to Mars: new psychological challenges and research issues. Acta Astronautica, vol. 55, pp. 781-790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Morphew M E (2001). Psychological and Human Factors in Long Duration Spaceflight. McGill Journal of Medicine, vol. 6(1), pp. 74-80.Google Scholar
  19. Nakatsu R, Rauterberg M and Salem B (2006). Forms and theories of communication: From multimedia to Kansei mediation. Multimedia Systems, vol. 11(3), pp. 304-312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. NASA (2004). Bioastronautics Critical Path Roadmap (BCPR): an approach to risk reduction and management for human space flight–extending the boundaries. Document JSC 62577 (draft), NASA.Google Scholar
  21. Neerincx M A and Streefkerk J W (2003). Interacting in desktop and mobile context: Emotion, trust and task performance. In: Aarts, E., Collier, R., van Loenen, E. & de Ruyter, B. (Eds.),Ambient Intelligence: EUSAI 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (pp. 119-132), Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Neerincx M A, Lindenberg J, Smets N, Grant T, Bos A, Olmedo Soler A,. Brauer U and Wolff M (2006). Cognitive engineering for long duration missions: human-machine collaboration on the Moon and Mars. In: Proceedings of 2nd IEEE International Conference on Space Mission Challenges for Information Technology (pp. 40-46), Los Alamitos, California: IEEE.Google Scholar
  23. Palinkas L A (2001). Psychosocial issues in long-term space flights: overview. Gravitational and Space Biology Bulletin, vol. 14(2), pp. 25-33.Google Scholar
  24. Palinkas L A and Houseal M (2000). Stages of change in mood and behaviour during a winter in Antarctica. Environment and Behavior, vol. 32(1), pp. 128-141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Palinkas L A, Johnson J C and Boster J S (2004). Social support and depressed mood in isolated and confined environments. Acta Astronautica, vol. 54, pp. 639-647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rauterberg, M., Bichsel, M., Meier, M., Fjeld, M. (1997). A gesture based interaction technique of a planning tool for construction and design. In: Proceedings 6th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Communication–RO-MAN’97, (IEEE Catalog Number: 97TH8299, pp. 212-217). Piscataway: IEEE Press.Google Scholar
  27. Rauterberg M (1993). AMME: an Automatic Mental Model Evaluation to analyze user behaviour traced in a finite, discrete state space. Ergonomics, vol. 36(11), pp. 1369-1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rauterberg M (2003). Determinants for collaboration in networked multi-user games. In: R Nakatsu and J Hoshino (eds.), Entertainment Computing–Technologies and Applications(pp. 313-321). IFIP, Kluwer Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rauterberg, M. (2004). Positive effects of entertainment technology on human behaviour. In: R. Jacquart (ed.), Building the Information Society(pp. 51-58). IFIP, Kluwer Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sandal G M (2001a). Psychosocial issues space: future challenges. Gravitational and Space Biology Bulletin, vol. 14(2), pp. 47-54.Google Scholar
  31. Sandal G M (2001b). Crew tension during a space station simulation. Environment and Behavior, vol. 33(1), pp. 134-150.Google Scholar
  32. Santy P (1983). The journey out and in: psychiatry and space exploration. American Journal of Psychiatry, vol. 140, pp. 519-527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Santy P (1987). Psychiatric components of a Health Maintenance Facility (HMF) on space station. Aviation, Space and Environmental Medicine, vol. 58, pp. 1219-1224.Google Scholar
  34. Spronk P (2005). Adaptive Game AI. PhD Thesis, IKAT- University of Maastricht, Netherlands. Suedfeld P and Steel G D (2000). The environmental psychology of capsule habitants. Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 51, pp. 227-253.Google Scholar
  35. Tafforin C (1996). Ethological analysis of crew member behaviour: distance, orientations, and postures. Advances in Space Biology and Medicine, vol. 5, pp. 263-281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Torrance E P (1954). The behaviour of small groups under stress conditions of “survival”. American Sociological Review, vol. 19(6), pp. 751-755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tuyls K and Nowe A (2005). Evolutionary game theory and multi-agent reinforcement learning. The Knowledge Engineering Review, vol. 20(1), pp. 63-90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tuyls K, ’t Hoen P J and Vanschoenwinkel B (2006). An evolutionary dynamical analysis of multi-agent learning in iterated games. The Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, vol. 12(1), pp. 115 - 153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Walther J B (1997). Group and interpersonal effects in international computer-mediated collaboration. Human Communication Research, vol. 23(3), pp. 342-369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Woolford B, Hudy C, Whitmore M, Berman A, Maida J and Pandya A (2002). In Situ training project: LMLSTP phase III report. In: H W Lane, R L Sauer and D L Feeback (eds.), ISOLATION: NASA experiments in closed environment living(pp. 407-417). American Astronautical Society.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthias Rauterberg
    • 1
  • Mark Neerincx
    • 2
  • Karl Tuyls
    • 1
  • Jack van Loon
    • 3
  1. 1.Eindhoven University of TechnologyThe Netherlands
  2. 2.TNO Human Factors & TU DelftThe Netherlands
  3. 3.DESC Space Flight/Microgravity & ACTA Free University AmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations