This article was downloaded by: [Bruce B. Janz]On: 30 January 2014, At: 06:45Publisher: Taylor & FrancisInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Theoretical Issues in ErgonomicsSciencePublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ttie20

Using a simulated environment toinvestigate experiences reportedduring space travelShaun Gallaghera, Lauren Reinerman-Jonesb, Brandon Sollinsb &Bruce Janzc

a Department of Philosophy, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN38152, USAb Institute for Simulation and Training, University of CentralFlorida, 3100 Technology Pkwy, Orlando, FL 32826, USAc Department of Philosophy, University of Central Florida,Orlando, FL 32826, USAPublished online: 28 Jan 2014.

To cite this article: Shaun Gallagher, Lauren Reinerman-Jones, Brandon Sollins & Bruce Janz ,Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science (2014): Using a simulated environment to investigateexperiences reported during space travel, Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, DOI:10.1080/1463922X.2013.869370

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1463922X.2013.869370

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,

systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bru

ce B

. Jan

z] a

t 06:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Using a simulated environment to investigate experiences reported

during space travel

Shaun Gallaghera, Lauren Reinerman-Jonesb*, Brandon Sollinsb and Bruce Janzc

aDepartment of Philosophy, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN 38152, USA; bInstitute forSimulation and Training, University of Central Florida, 3100 Technology Pkwy, Orlando, FL

32826, USA; cDepartment of Philosophy, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL 32826, USA

(Received 8 March 2013; accepted 21 November 2013)

Astronauts report certain experiences that can be classified as awe and wonder whenlooking out of their space station or shuttle portals at two different stimuli: the earthand deep space. Based on these reports, it was of interest to further investigate thosetypes of experiences by using a mixed-reality environment resembling anInternational Space Station workstation designed to expose subjects to simulatedstimuli of the earth and deep space. The study is multidisciplinary, involvingsimulation construction, physiological assessment, psychological testing, textualanalysis, and phenomenological interviews. The goal was to induce in the averageperson the experiences and responses of the astronauts. Preliminary results showpromise for using a virtual/mixed-reality environment in a laboratory when assessingcognitive/affective experiences, such as awe and wonder, found in a real-worldcontext.

Keywords: virtual and real-world environments; physiological measures; phenomeno-logical interviews; space; cognitive experiences

1. Introduction

The use of a simulated environment to create an experimental test bed where a number of

variables can be easily manipulated is an appealing idea for the exploration of certain

hard-to-test behavioural and experiential phenomena. The focus for this article is on the

methodologies used to study specific kinds of experiences undergone by astronauts during

space travel. For several reasons, the study of such experiences without the use of simula-

tion would be unfeasible or too expensive. For example, testing subjects on earth rather

than sending them into space is more affordable and it also provides a degree of control

over a number of important aspects. As will be illustrated, however, the use of simulation

(instead of real space flight) also comes with certain limitations.

The use of simulation allowed for replication and study of specific kinds of experien-

ces that, to our knowledge, have never before been studied scientifically. The experiences

range from deeply aesthetic to spiritual, to outright religious experiences reported by

numerous astronauts and cosmonauts during space flight, and recorded both in space-

flight journals and in reflections and interviews after returning to the earth.1The interdisci-

plinary project involves (1) textual analyses (including both hermeneutical and syntacti-

cal analyses) of original texts by astronauts, cosmonauts, and other space travellers, and

of follow-up interviews with study participants; (2) image analysis that defined specific

*Corresponding author. Email: lreinerm@ist.ucf.edu

� 2014 Taylor & Francis

Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 2014

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1463922X.2013.869370

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bru

ce B

. Jan

z] a

t 06:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

image criteria and selection of images appropriate for the design of the simulation; (3)

design and construction of a mixed-reality test environment – the ‘Virtual Space Lab’

(VSL); (4) experiment execution including psychological questionnaires to study partici-

pants; (5) collection of physiological data on participants while in the simulation; (6) use

of a specific phenomenological interview technique (Petitmengin 2006) in follow-up

interviews with study participants; and (7) the correlation of third-person data points with

the first-person reports generated in the interviews (an approach that has been termed

‘neurophenomenology’ [Gallagher and Brøsted Sørensen 2006; Lutz 2002; Lutz et al.

2002; Varela 1996]). Although this article reports some preliminary results, it focuses on

methods rather than results to demonstrate the extensive attention to detail necessary to

replicate the environment for inducing similar experiences and responses to those of the

astronauts.

2. Textual analysis

The starting point for the study was to identify and categorise experiences described by

astronauts, and to develop a set of specific categories of the experiences to study in appro-

priate detail. The texts included 51 accounts of varying lengths authored by different

astronauts describing their experiences during space flight. Some of the accounts were

authored while still in space in the astronauts’ journals (n ¼ 17; available at http://www.

nasa.gov/centers/ johnson/astronauts/journals_astronauts.html). Others were taken from

interviews of astronauts, cosmonauts, and other space travellers, or books written by

astronauts, after their return to the earth (n ¼ 34). The majority of the selected texts

involved descriptions of experiences undergone while looking out of the space vehicle’s

windows with views of the earth or deep space in close earth orbit. For purposes of analy-

sis, numbers from 1 to 51 were assigned and information about the author, including

name, was not included. In other words, the text spoke for itself, irrelevant of demo-

graphics or personal identifiers.

The experiences to be investigated are described in a general way by the following

terms and definitions:

Awe (A) – a direct and initial experience or feeling when faced with something incomprehen-sible or sublime.

Wonder (W) – a reflective experience motivated when one is unable to put things into afamiliar conceptual framework – leading to open questions rather than conclusions.

Awe and wonder (AW) constitute a general characterisation of experiences reported

by astronauts in their journals during space flight and in interviews and reflections after

returning to the earth. To make the study of these experiences more precise, however, we

conducted a hermeneutical and syntactical analysis of these journals and texts. The aim

was to derive more specific categories of experience from the astronauts’ own expressions

and to allow these specific categories to guide the interpretation of our results.

A hermeneutical analysis is concerned with meaning or semantics. Hermeneutics has

a long history that includes debates about the interpretation of sacred, legal, and literary

texts. In the nineteenth century, it was made more systematic in terms of its methodology

in the German schools of Schleiermacher and Dilthey, influencing Verstehen sociology in

the early twentieth century. Today it is generally agreed that texts have multiple meanings

that outstrip the original intentions of their authors (Gadamer 1989). This can make

2 S. Gallagher et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bru

ce B

. Jan

z] a

t 06:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

hermeneutical practice (that is, the interpretation of texts) a contentious issue, sometimes

characterised by a conflict of interpretations. Science itself is not immune to this problem

since the interpretation of data often generates disagreement and debate. Scientists can

agree on the data, but disagree about what they mean.

To circumvent hermeneutical conflict, the present investigation employed a process

involving intersubjective verification. Two philosophers with training in hermeneutics

worked independently on the astronauts’ texts identifying specific expressions of experi-

ence (i.e. what the astronauts were perceiving, feeling, or thinking) and categorising them

using descriptive terminology. For example, one astronaut, who was taking photos out

the window of the International Space Station (ISS), writes:

What an amazing, spectacular, incredible, mind blowing view! I so wish I could have cap-tured it, but as sensitive as I set things up, it wasn’t enough. I also needed to switch to manualfocus and didn’t have time to make the adjustments fast enough. So for a moment I just staredat the incredible display of life below me.

This was descriptively categorised as involving two relevant experiences: (1) a feeling

of being overwhelmed by what he saw (‘amazing, spectacular, incredible, mind blow-

ing’). Just a few lines later, he actually uses the term ‘overwhelmed’ (‘I was just over-

whelmed by the beauty’). (2) An experience of being captured by the view, or drawn to

the phenomenon, expressed in the line: ‘So for a moment I just stared at the incredible dis-

play of life below me,’ and in the description of the context.

A category can be expressed in different descriptions by the same or by different sub-

jects. For example, the category of being captured by the view or drawn to the phenome-

non can also be seen in the following description by a different astronaut:

Something else happened recently that will always be a special memory for me. I took a peekout the side-facing JEM windows one evening, without camera in hand, and was so mesmer-ized that I ended up gazing upon the Earth for an entire 90-minute orbit. Believe it or not,that is the first time I have done that. A hundred times I thought, “I should go grab the cam-era,” but I decided to just try to capture this one orbit with my own eyes and burn it into mybrain.. . .

The results of the two independent interpretations were then brought together and

were subject to a negotiation process where agreement was reached about specific inter-

pretations and about terminology. The result was a list of 48 specific categories that

described the astronauts’ experiences. The original texts and this list of categories were

then given to a total of 20 students (5 undergraduates; 4 cognitive science graduate stu-

dents; and 11 philosophy graduate students at two different universities). They worked

independently to match categories to texts. By correlating the results of this process (tak-

ing only categories matched by at least six of the students and consolidating several of

the categories, we confirmed a consensus set of 34 of the original list of 49. The top six

categories on this consensus list in the order of frequency (number of instances in the

astronauts’ reports) were aesthetic appreciation, intellectual appreciation, captured by

view (drawn to phenomenon), feeling of being overwhelmed, poetic expression, and sen-

sory affect (see the complete list of 34 categories in the Appendix).

Because these 34 consensus categories are more specific than AW, and were gener-

ated in a process that focused on the astronauts’ first-person experience, we used them to

analyse post-simulation interviews. A number of categories were also used to develop

more precise categorisations of AW (Table 1).

Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bru

ce B

. Jan

z] a

t 06:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Those categories that fell outside of the AW characterisation were nonetheless related

to other relevant aspects of aesthetic or spiritual experience. For example, some astro-

nauts expressed a feeling of a visual experience being dream-like, or involving a novel

change in spatial perspective (e.g. the uniqueness of seeing the earth from space), or

involving aesthetic appreciation of the beauty of the universe.

In addition to the hermeneutical analysis, we initiated a syntactical analysis using the

Coh-Metrix computer software developed in the Psychology Department at the Univer-

sity of Memphis (http://cohmetrix.memphis.edu). Coh-Metrix analyses the coherence of

texts based on a wide range of measures (Graesser et al. 2004). We were interested in a

number of questions that Coh-Metrix can answer. One of the things we wanted to know is

whether there are significant differences between the in-flight journals and the post-flight

descriptions found in interviews and books. Preliminary results indicate causal cohesion

and differentiation of concreteness versus abstractness of the narratives.

Causal cohesion reflects the extent to which sentences are related by expressed causal

relations. It calculates the number of semantically identifiable causal verbs (e.g. drop, fill),

causal particles (because, in order to), and semantically depleted verbs (e.g. cause, make).

The more the causal verbs in a text, the more the text is assumed to convey causal content.

Cohesion drops, however, when a text contains too many causal verbs (signifying events

and actions), but few causal particles provide an indication of how the events and actions

are connected. Causal cohesion is the ratio of causal particles to causal verbs (Figure 1(a)).

Table 1. Cross-referencing of AW and concrete categories.

AweCaptured by view/drawn to phenomenonElationExperience-hungry (wanting more of a particular experience)Overwhelmed (feelings of being overwhelmed by situation or perception)SurpriseScale effects (feelings of the vastness of the universe or one’s own smallness/insignificance)

WonderInspiredNostalgiaPerspectival shift (internal change of attitude, connected with moral insight)Unity with whole (feeling of oneness with; holistic feeling, melting into everything).Unity of external (unity of the universe, oneness of everything; solidarity of people on earth;interrelatedness/ complex unity)Responsibility (towards others)

Figure 1. Coh-Metrex analysis.

4 S. Gallagher et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bru

ce B

. Jan

z] a

t 06:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Coh-Metrix also measures word abstractness. A word is abstract when it has few distinc-

tive features and few attributes. Abstractness is measured in Coh-Metrix by the noun hypernym

values in Word-Net, an online lexical reference system (Fellbaum 1998; Miller et al. 1990).

The hypernym count is defined by Coh-Metrix as ‘the number of levels in a conceptual taxo-

nomic hierarchy above (superordinate to) a word. For example, chair (as a seat) has seven

hypernym levels: seat !furniture !furnishings!instrumentality!artifact!object!entity. A

word having more hypernym levels is more concrete. A word with fewer hypernym levels is

more abstract’ (http://cohmetrix.memphis.edu/CohMetrixWeb2/HelpFile2.htm) (Figure 1(b)).

Likewise, Coh-Metrix assesses how concrete or non-abstract a word is on the basis of

human ratings using the MRC Psycholinguistics Database (Coltheart 1981). Concreteness

measures the degree to which a word has easily accessible mental images and direct sen-

sory referents. Words like ‘spoon’ or ‘water’ are less abstract than words like ‘justice’ or

‘moral.’ Higher scores are more concrete than lower scores (Figure 1(c)).

On all three measures, the in-flight journals seem to have the virtue of a more immedi-

ate, perception-based reporting in that they reflect more causal coherence and are more

concrete (less abstract) than post-flight reports. In addition, since a more reflective mem-

ory is involved in the post-flight texts and more distance from the original experience,

post-flight texts may not be as dependable as a veridical portrayal of that experience. This

may justify further analysis to see if these differences reflect differences in type or fre-

quency of occurrence of the specific consensus categories, and whether the post-simula-

tion interviews are closer to in-flight journals or post-flight texts in this regard.

3. Image interpretation

Once the details about the four experiences were ascertained from the astronaut texts, the

next step was to identify images that would be best suited for an earth-bound VSL simula-

tion, keeping in mind the goal, which was to enable the greatest opportunity for persons

on the earth to have the same experiences of AW had by astronauts in space. The choice

of images is informed by a number of considerations, including availability, image qual-

ity, details about practices in the different space vehicles involved, and historical analysis

of the image. In regard to the latter, for example, the classic ‘Blue Marble’ image, the

best-known example of a space image that strongly affected the feelings of many people

worldwide, is a photograph taken on 7 December 1972 by the Apollo 17 mission. This

image shows the earth from a perspective in outer space and was the first photograph

many people saw of the planet they inhabited. Its effect is dependent upon the powerful

emotions it evokes. Before it was able to have this kind of impact, the photograph – taken

with 70-mm Hasselblad camera and an 80-mm lens – had to be reoriented. Originally, the

South Pole was visible to the crew of the Apollo 17 at the top of the globe; the published

image was rotated 180� to provide a view familiar from maps and atlases. In effect, what

the astronauts actually saw and marvelled about was not precisely depicted in the popular

image. In addition, as a rule, the earth appears partially in shadow, so the most celebrated

image of the planet is also a relatively uncharacteristic one. This example highlights that

the task to find images suitable for a simulation cannot rely exclusively on the reports

from the astronauts or an uncritical acceptance of images from NASA.

Our research team included members of the Bildakt group2 in Berlin who used the

NASA Image Database to define criteria for image selection for the VSL. The NASA

database is classified according to four major categories (item, location, person, time).

These categories do not differentiate between media, contexts, or individuals, so that spe-

cific keywords like ‘earth’ (23,491 entries) or ‘sun’ (16,092 entries) also return a large

Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bru

ce B

. Jan

z] a

t 06:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

number of diagrams, models, artistic views (drawings, paintings), documentary photo-

graphs of laboratories, staff, etc. Less than 10% of all images in the gallery were consid-

ered relevant for selection. The following selection criteria were defined:

� no (or little) artifacts due to optical refraction and other lens effects;

� no aged colours on chemical films;

� no visible manipulation in terms of colouring, digital editing, etc.;

� no markings and inscriptions (except watermarks made by a photographer, which

can be cropped);

� pictures should be focused or rich in detail;

� views should be possible from a spacecraft within the earth–moon system and could

be made by human observers;

� earth view: earth should be visible as crescent, not as iconic blue marble;

� space view: no particular object(s) should dominate the image; image may be used

as background for animation; number of visible stars should be higher than in a sky

seen from earth (¼ clarity of sight).

A number of challenges were met in following these criteria. First, finding high-qual-

ity images that showed on monitors in high fidelity was difficult. Our first attempts looked

flat. Second, images had to be dynamic in ways that did not violate the laws of physics.

Fortunately, on 25 January 2012, NASA released a composite image of the western hemi-

sphere of the earth entitled Blue Marble 2012 (Figure 2(A)). The picture was widely

viewed, logging over 3.1 million views on the Flickr image-hosting website within the

first week of release. On 2 February 2012, NASA released a companion to this new Blue

Marble, showing a composite image of the eastern hemisphere. These images served as

the basis for developing a three-dimensional simulation for the VSL. Simulation develop-

ers introduced a crescent element (Figure 2(B), modified image), and this was one image

incorporated into the VSL, which moved relative to the observer.

4. VSL design

A number of important limitations constrained the design and construction of the VSL.

The VSL was constructed in a lab at the Institution of Simulation and Training at the

Figure 2. (A) Blue Marble 2012. (B) Modified image used as the basis for one part of thesimulation.

6 S. Gallagher et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bru

ce B

. Jan

z] a

t 06:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

University of Central Florida. It was obviously located on the earth and not moving rela-

tive to anything on the earth. One clear limitation was that we could not simulate weight-

lessness in any way that would not interfere with the visuals and the experimental

requirements. However, this was not expected to be a problem for several reasons. First,

reports contained in the astronauts’ journals suggested that there was little explicit con-

nection between weightlessness and the visual stimuli that generated the experiences in

question. Weightlessness is an issue at the beginning of the space journey and is

addressed in a pragmatic fashion with the main concern about movement and being able

to control action. After a few days, these issues are resolved and there is not much discus-

sion of weightlessness and, with one exception, any mention of weightlessness in connec-

tion with the visual experiences at the window. Second, we employed a seated

workstation scenario that minimised the difference between the effects of zero-g and one-

g. That is, being strapped into a workstation, as astronauts sometimes are, minimises the

different practical effects of zero-g and one-g. In such circumstances, the presence or

absence of gravity makes little practical difference. Nevertheless, it is noted that the

implicit effects of weightlessness and vestibular modulations on the visual system could

not be controlled. There is some evidence that long-term weightlessness does have an

effect on vision (Kramer et al. 2012; Mader et al. 2011). However, changes manifest

themselves only after several months in microgravity.

Another set of limitations involved the narrative (rather than physical) entry into and

exit from the simulation. That is, participants knew that they were not leaving earth and

that they would not really be in space. Yet, it was thought, a higher level of immersion in

the simulation would depend on making the experience as convincing as possible, given

certain physical and budgetary limitations. A launch sequence and landing sequence facil-

itated immersion in the narrative of being in space. Accordingly, we introduced convinc-

ing auditory effects to simulate launch – the loud and authentic sound of the space shuttle

launch rockets that began after a vocal countdown and eventually cut-off to silence,

which signalled arrival in space. This was a simple solution that worked quite well, and

as discussed later, a number of participants reported a degree of realism connected with

the sound, vibrations, and a feeling that they were taking-off. The landing sequence,

which was less important, involved a series of radio announcements.

The physical size and location of the VSL also required some problem solving involv-

ing lab space and noise levels. The interior of the VSL was modelled on a workstation on

the ISS (Figure 3(A)), which allowed access to a console of computer equipment and

Figure 3. (A) Workstation in the ISS. (B) Interior of VSL.

Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bru

ce B

. Jan

z] a

t 06:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

windows. In the VSL (Figure 3(B)), we wanted to limit any distraction from the window

visuals, so we minimised the complexity of the console area and provided only a

desktop-computer monitor, kept completely dark during the time the windows were open,

and a desktop mouse.

5. Method

5.1. Participants

Thirty-eight participants (13 males, 25 females) with an average age of 20.94 years were

recruited from general psychology classes. Participants were provided with an informed

consent form and restrictions list. Participants were screened for the following conditions:

age, right-handedness, colour blindness, seizures, tobacco or caffeine intake, alcohol con-

sumption, and ingestion of antipsychotics or antidepressants. Most of these restrictions

are also requirements for astronauts preparing for space travel. The full course of the

experiment lasted 2.5 hours.

5.2. Narrative

As each participant prepared for the experiment, a space-flight narrative was initiated,

explaining that he or she would be involved in a simulated space flight. ‘Welcome to

your pre-flight preparation. Before we begin, do you need to use the restroom? Let’s

begin the first phase by having you follow me to the cockpit where we will begin your

astronaut qualification examination.’ Various events outlined in the narrative included

connection to the physiological instruments and completion of a battery of questionnaires.

The narrative continued as the participant ‘suited up,’ i.e. was connected to the various

physiological sensors with a detailed explanation of the devices. Once the participant was

connected, a 5-minute resting baseline was executed, requiring the participant to remain

still and quiet while gazing at the blank monitor.

5.3. Questionnaires

A battery of online questionnaires was then administered in the VSL, acclimating partici-

pants to the new environment. The questionnaires included the following:

� Brief Multidimensional Measure of Religiousness/Spirituality (BMMRS) (Masters

et al. 2009) was used to identify religious or spiritual preferences and practices.

� Need for Cognition Scale (NCS) (Cacioppo and Petty 1982) was used to determine

the tendency to want their mind to be engaged in active thinking and complex prob-

lem solving.

� Multiple Stimulus Types Ambiguity Tolerance (Mclain 1993) was used to assess

openness and acceptance of items or concepts that are not concrete.

� Tellegen Absorption Scale (TAS) (Tellegen and Atkinson 1974) was used to under-

stand likelihood to be immersed and enveloped in an environment.

� Simulator Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ) (Kennedy et al. 1993) was used to

ensure that participants were at full capacity in the simulator and not negatively

impacted by the simulator. The SSQ was not for use in formal analyses of results,

only for monitoring the participants’ state in the simulator during the experimen-

tal session.

8 S. Gallagher et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bru

ce B

. Jan

z] a

t 06:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

5.4. Experimental design

Participants seated alone in the VSL began the launch sequence. Following the launch,

one portal opened, presenting one of four space views. Each one lasted for 12 minutes.

(1) The earth (including the image discussed above).

(2) Deep space (stars and gassy formations).

(3) The earth with object (the earth as in (1) plus the passing appearance the ISS).

(4) Deep space with object (deep space as in (2) plus the passing appearance of the

moon).

This was a 2(earth or deep space) � 2(object or no object) mixed design with repeated

measures on the first variable. Each participant received two experimental conditions in a

counter-balanced order. Participants completed the SSQ on the computer monitor follow-

ing each condition. The astronaut texts indicate that experiences of AW occurred when

viewing the earth or deep space, but astronauts’ missions occurred in different space cap-

sules, some of which allowed viewing of the ISS where others were in the ISS. The exper-

imental design was intended to enable investigation of experiencers of AW compared to

non-experiencers of AW by maximising the opportunity to induce those experiences with

different space views that map to those reported by astronauts.

5.5. Physiological measures

Each participant was connected to electroencephalography (EEG), functional near-infra-

red spectroscopy, and electrocardiogram (ECG) equipment. The Advanced Brain Moni-

toring X10 EEG/ECG system measures electrical activity of the brain and heart in

response to the above-described stimuli. Nine channels assess neural activity yielding the

power spectral density outputs of alpha, beta, and theta waves for each channel. These

channels combine for measures of right and left hemisphere responses. The remaining

10th channel of the X10 is dedicated to receiving input from the electrical activity of the

heart. Measures derived include heart rate (HR), HR variability, and interbeat interval

(IBI). The Covidien INVOS�5100C Cerebral/Somatic Oximeter System sends near-

infrared rays into the brain with one sensor and receives metabolic usage at another sen-

sor, measuring oxygenation of cortical tissue in the pre-frontal cortex. PhysioSync, a

computer software program developed by the Applied Cognition and Training in Immer-

sive Virtual Environments Laboratory (ACTIVE Lab), allowed for synchronised multi-

sensor recording.

5.6. Phenomenological interview

Following the landing sequence, participants were disconnected from the equipment and

led to an interview room for ‘debriefing.’ A 30-minute interview was conducted by per-

sonnel using a specific phenomenological interview technique. Interviews were audio

recorded and then transcribed. The interviews were based on a method developed in the

Varela lab in Paris (Petitmengin 2006). The approach is characterised by open questions.

That is, the interviewer simply asks the participant to talk about his or her experiences

during the launch and visuals in the VSL, without providing a pre-determined vocabulary

or list of items to be discussed. The interview explored the participants’ experiences dur-

ing events in the VSL (launch sequence, first portal opening, questionnaire, second portal

Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bru

ce B

. Jan

z] a

t 06:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

opening, and landing sequence). Subsequently, the interview is remapped onto the simu-

lation timeline, lining up the interview description with the sequence of events in the

simulation.

The focus of the interview was on the living participant’s (first person) experiences –

what they were experiencing, feeling, thinking about as they viewed space through the por-

tals (see example passages from interviews in the following). In cases where participants

digressed from experiential descriptions, interviewers led the participants back to the expe-

riences in the VSL. Interviewers also periodically paraphrased and repeated the partic-

ipants’ statements, paying careful attention to use the participants’ own words, in order to

confirm that the interviewer understood. Such confirming reviews also provided the partici-

pant with opportunities for adding something they forgot, or clarifying their descriptions.

The transcriptions of the phenomenological interviews underwent hermeneutical analysis

using the consensus categories. This analysis shows replication of some of the astronauts’

experiences, but not all. Syntactic analysis of the interview texts is not yet complete.

6. Results

The data analysis approach was to first determine if the experimental design elicited expe-

riences similar to those reported in the astronaut texts. If the phenomenological interviews

resulted in like reporting, then a tally of those who experienced AW would ensue for each

of the four experimental conditions. This distinction between experiencers and non-expe-

riencers of AW would then be used to identify the relation between those who experience

AW versus those who did not with the questionnaire and physiological responses.

6.1. Hermeneutical analysis

Results suggest participants’ responses to the VSL are similar to those expressed in the

astronauts’ reports. In providing some initial indications from the phenomenological

interviews, it may be best to present them in comparison with some of the astronaut

reports. First, consider two reports from astronauts indicating aesthetic appreciation,

some feeling or realisation about size (scale effects) or a shift in moral perspective, and

compare them to two interviews that touch on the same feelings. As indicated above, on

the operative definitions, scale effects are indicative of experiences of awe; perspectival

(moral) shifts reflect experiences of wonder.

Astronaut report 6

From these windows, the Earth is so obviously floating in an endless void, and the feelingthat washes over you is the sense of scale of the universe. The feeling I got was one of recog-nition that we are living on a such a tiny island in a vast ocean [scale effects].

Astronaut report 24

One is just the sheer wonder of looking down at the Earth. It is very, very beautiful. . . partic-ularly when you see it interface on the edge with space [aesthetic appreciation]. There yousuddenly get the feeling that, hey, this is just one small planet which is lost in the middle ofspace. . . [A] very important feeling about the fact that we’re just drifting through an immenseuniverse. . . [scale effects]. [Y]ou become a little more conscious about the fact that weshouldn’t be doing silly things on Earth like fighting and killing each other [perspectival(moral) shift].

10 S. Gallagher et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bru

ce B

. Jan

z] a

t 06:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Participant 3

I guess I was a little. . . not shocked but amazed a little bit cause I find it fascinating—outerspace, space travel, things like that. So, it’s a view that you don’t see regularly. So, it kind ofgot me interested in seeing the difference between what you see every day about Earth, andyou don’t really look at it from such a big point of view that everybody’s on that small littleplanet, and you’re so far away now. So, it’s a different view on Earth. . .. I think it just reallymakes you feel less important when you look at everything in such a view like that. You’rejust a speck on the Earth that’s in a universe of many different planets. You’re small com-pared to everything else [scale effects], and I didn’t feel too bad, but it kinda makes me feellike my problems now are not really as big as I think they are compared to everything else inthe world [perspectival (moral) shift].

Participant 1

I was just kind of looking at the stars and admiring what I saw. I think it’s the vastness ofreality. . .. then I start thinking of how huge our universe is. Like, just looking at this, and thisis just a little part of what I’m looking at and how much more there is [scale effects]. That’sthe part that I admired. . . The beauty of the lights and all that [aesthetic appreciation], but,to me, somebody created all that. That blows me away. . .. [My] mood would be like: takenback, in awe, I was definitely admiring, definitely peaceful, relaxed, and then just like in aweof my mind taking me where I was really reflecting on how huge space is.

In one case, during much of the interview, one of the participants indicated that he did

not have sufficient sleep the night before, and that he found himself bored and often

sleepy (his eyes starting to close) during the visuals presented in the VSL. Even this par-

ticipant, however, expressed something similar about scale.

Participant 5

P5: It was just like. . . It is a vast amount of space that we are not going to be able to, as a spe-cies of homo sapiens, we’re not going to be able to identify and figure out everything. . . Eventhough we try to, there’s just too much going on and the Earth is always gonna have itssecrets. . .. You feel so small compared to everything else. So, you’re looking at this vastamount of space . . . where your home is barely the tip of the needle point. . .. How big areyou compared to that? Like, you’re probably only maybe an eighth, maybe a sixteenth of thatneedle point. It makes you kind of realize that there’s a lot more out there. . . It’s not just thelittle space that you live and work and breath in [scale effects].

Consider the following examples, more reflectively religious in tenor; the first from an

astronaut’s report, the second from one of the participant interviews.

Astronaut report 28

I frequently recalled what King David had written thousands of years ago in Psalm 19: ‘theheavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament showeth his handiwork’. That order,that creation was very apparent to me as I looked back on this beautiful planet that looked sofragile at the same time.

Participant 1

I did reflect on a scripture that talks about god holding the universe in his hand. So as I keptgoing and going and going and I thought, wow that’s pretty cool, that here it is, just this short

Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bru

ce B

. Jan

z] a

t 06:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

bit of time that I see all of this and how big it must be that he holds it in the palm of hishand. . . Yea, basically I was just at peace and knowing that I could never comprehend trulythe vastness of it all. . . .I just kind of reflected on how cool it was to be able to see how smallEarth is from my perspective up in space. You know, we think of the Earth as huge, butwhen you’re looking down at it you can start seeing how from there it could almost fit in thepalm of your hand, then it was like, kinda cool.

6.2. Questionnaires

Further analysis on differences between experiencers of AW and non-experiencers of AW

in light of questionnaire responses enabled a derivative variable. In particular, correla-

tions were conducted for each of the questionnaires with A and then W for each experi-

mental condition. It is important to note that the text was the central focus for

determining if participants had similar experiences to those reported by astronauts. Since

astronauts did not complete the questionnaires or wear the physiological sensors we

employed in our study, these cannot be directly compared to the astronauts’ responses.

However, they might provide interesting insight as to why some participants and, then

based on inference, why some astronauts have AW experiences, whereas others do not.

In the category of experiencers of awe during the earth condition, there were positive

correlations between the experiential comforting faith subscale (r ¼ .525, p ¼ .021) and

the private religious practices subscale (r ¼ .506, p ¼ .027) on the BMMRS. The

BMMRS is reversed score, which indicates that participants who experienced awe indi-

cated lower levels of experiential comforting faith and private religious practices. There

were no significant correlations in experiencers of wonder during the earth condition.

For experiencers of awe during the deep-space condition, there is a positive correla-

tion between the sensory-perceptual absorption scale (r ¼ .481, p ¼ .037) on the TAS,

and a negative correlation between the private religious practices subscale (r ¼ �.495,

p ¼ .031) on the BMMRS. Again, since items are reversed scored on the BMMRS, this

correlation suggests that for participants who experienced awe, levels of private religious

practices were lower.

For experiencers of awe during the earth-with-object condition, there were negative

correlations between the intuition (r ¼ �.488, p ¼ .016) and trance (r ¼ �.512, p ¼ .011)

subscales on the TAS, while a positive correlation was found for the need for cognition

(NFC) (r ¼ .512, p ¼ .010). No significant correlations were found for experiencers of

wonder during the earth-with-object condition.

For experiencers of awe during the deep space-with-object condition, there was a neg-

ative correlation with the private religious practices subscale (r ¼ �.551, p ¼ .005) on the

BMMRS. Because of the reverse scoring on the BMMRS, this correlation again shows

that for participants who experienced awe, their levels of private religious practices were

lower. There were no significant correlations for experiencers of wonder during the deep

space-with-object condition.

6.3. Physiological measures

In line with seeking to understand the relation of AW experiencers with physiological

response, correlations were conducted (for detailed analyses, see Reinerman-Jones et al.

2013)

Participants exhibited negative correlations in the earth condition between their expe-

rience of awe and levels of left hemisphere theta (r ¼ �.478, p ¼ .038) and right

12 S. Gallagher et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bru

ce B

. Jan

z] a

t 06:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

hemisphere theta (r ¼ �.466, p ¼ .044). Experiencers of wonder during the earth condi-

tion resulted in no significant correlations.

Experiencers of wonder during the deep-space condition exhibited a positive correla-

tion for average IBI (r ¼ .469, p ¼ .043). There were no significant correlations with awe

experiencers.

There were no significant correlations found in the earth with object or deep space

with object between experiencers of AW and the physiological measures.

7. Discussion

The primary aim for this study was to replicate and explain (in psychological, physiologi-

cal, and phenomenological terms) certain kinds of experiences had by astronauts during

space flight. A secondary aim was to explore a specific methodology that employed simu-

lation technology and phenomenological report in a neurophenomenological design.

Although the results concerning the primary aim are preliminary at this point, they are

sufficient to suggest that the methodology followed in this study is a viable one.

Neither every participant conveyed experiences that could be classified using the con-

sensus list of categories, or in broader terms of aesthetics, spirituality, or religiosity, nor,

as far as we know, did every astronaut or cosmonaut. The results, however, support the

primary aim for the present study, replicating, within a simulated environment, experien-

ces previously had by individuals only in the special environment of extraterrestrial

space. Statements made by participants in the present experiment resemble those made

by astronauts in their journals. From the hermeneutical analysis of the interviews, it

appears that many, but not all of the relevant astronaut experiences were replicated. No

experiences of elation or of unity with the universe (feeling of oneness with everything)

were generated in the simulations. The most frequent experiences were:

� perspectival (moral) shift (42 instances);

� interest/inquisitiveness (22 instances);

� contentment (22 instances);

� significant sensory experience (e.g. impressed by silence or visuals) (21 instances);

� inspired (reflective experience) (18 instances).

The categories that are expressed most frequently in the astronaut journals appear

with the following frequencies in the post-simulation interviews:

� Aesthetic appreciation [14].

� Intellectual appreciation [7].

� Captured by view (drawn to phenomenon) [3].

� Feeling of being overwhelmed [7].

� Poetic expression [1].

� Significant sensory experiences [21].

Drawing from those interviews, high-level classifications of experiencers versus non-

experiencers of AW were determined, enabling correlational analyses with questionnaire

and physiological responses. Several religious and spiritual traits were found to be associ-

ated with the likelihood to experience awe. Experiencers of awe in the earth condition

indicated lower levels of experiential comforting faith and private religious practices

compared to non-experiencers of awe. On the BMMRS, the experiential comforting faith

Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 13

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bru

ce B

. Jan

z] a

t 06:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

subscale is comprised of items that reflect an experience of a close relationship with a

higher power by asking for responses to such statements as ‘I feel God’s presence’ and ‘I

desire to be closer or in union with God.’ Additionally, the private religious practice sub-

scales consist of items that identify religious/spiritual behaviours in terms of responses to

questions such as ‘How often do you meditate?’ and ‘How often do you read sacred reli-

gious texts?’ The results indicate that participants who experienced awe in the earth con-

dition tended to have a weaker perceived relation with a higher power and performed less

religious/spiritual behaviours. In contrast, participants who experienced awe during the

deep space-with-object condition tended to engage in religious practices more often than

non-experiencers of awe. Taken together, these results show generally that religious/spiri-

tual traits are factors for some, but not all people who experience awe. Further, the visual

association with religious and spiritual practices is important to consider in future simula-

tion development plans.

Participants who experienced awe during the earth-with-object condition tended to

report lower levels of intuition and trance as measured by the TAS. The intuition subscale

on the TAS measures a person’s ability to ‘feel’ and ‘experience’ the world around them

without directly experiencing it through the senses. For example, the subscale asks for

responses to the following statements: ‘At times I somehow feel the presence of someone

who is not physically there,’ and ‘I often know what someone is going to say before he or

she says it.’ Additionally, the trance subscale measures mystical experiences through

responses to items such as ‘I think I really know what some people mean when they talk

about mystical experiences,’ and ‘Sometimes I experience things as if they were doubly

real.’ These findings may reflect participants not needing to use their imagination to

understand the scale of the earth since they had a reference point in this condition, that

being the object that enters the visual field, the ISS. This suggests that for people who are

not abstract, intuitive thinkers, simulations designed to provide concrete images are better

for inducing awe.

Similarly, experiencers of awe in the earth-with-object condition tended to have a

higher NFC as measured by the NCS. This is related to the previous finding that experi-

encers of awe in this condition prefer concrete constructs. Individuals rating high on the

NFC like to think critically and apply logic to derive explanations. The appearance of the

ISS in the visual field may provide a definite point of reference offering an explanatory

clarification of the earth’s size.

Experiencers of awe in the deep-space condition rated higher on the sensory-percep-

tual absorption scale. Questions on this scale ask about a person’s sense of being con-

nected with or separated from what is physically present. In other words, someone might

be so immersed in a task that their consciousness feels changed; or their engagement with

physical objects or with nature sends them into thoughts of something sentimental like

music. This suggests that individuals who experienced awe in the deep-space condition

likely ‘got lost’ in the vastness of the stars. This has implications for designing simula-

tions to induce that feeling of overwhelming depth.

Finally, correlations were found between experiencers of AW and physiological

response. Experiencers of wonder showed higher IBI in the deep-space condition. The

IBI is the amount of time between heartbeats. It is possible that those struck with wonder

in the deep-space condition were holding their breath while pondering the universe, lead-

ing to longer durations between heartbeats. It also might be that individuals who experi-

enced wonder in this condition were in a more meditative state leading to longer intervals

between heartbeats. We have not compared the likelihood of participants to experience

AW together because we have been looking at these as separate phenomenon, but it is

14 S. Gallagher et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bru

ce B

. Jan

z] a

t 06:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

possible that a person who experiences awe is more likely to experience wonder. If that is

the case, then the above-mentioned correlations between the experience of awe in the

deep-space condition and higher ratings on the sensory-perceptual absorption scale would

add support to this IBI finding of such participants being fully immersed in or entranced

by the view.

Experiencers of awe during the earth condition tended to exhibit lower levels of

global theta (left and right hemispheres) compared to non-experiencers of awe. This pat-

tern of activation in theta indicates that experiencers were more engaged and alert than

their non-experiencer counterparts who might have been bored or fatigued.

The correlation data provide insight into which experimental conditions are associated

with individual differences. However, it does seem that these differences are more

strongly related to awe and offer less insight into what differentiates experiencers and

non-experiencers of wonder. Furthermore, it seems that this trend is more relevant to the

earth conditions rather than the deep-space conditions. Interestingly, this suggests consid-

erations about simulation design, based on those individual differences, but further

research is needed to more directly assess those design hypotheses.

These preliminary results suggest that the methodology followed in this study is a via-

ble one and demonstrate the promise of simulation technology for designing experiments

in psychology and cognitive science. The present experiment enabled replication on the

earth, with average persons, of experiences first reported by astronauts, who are among

an elite few who have actually had the opportunity to see the earth and space from an

extraterrestrial vantage. This supports the use of carefully designed and developed simu-

lation technology in the scientific investigation of such experiences. Successful induction

of AW experiences were enabled by a selection of realistic images (images actually taken

in space), but set in a surrounding environment that helped the person suspend disbelief

about being in space. It is not just enough to ‘go big’ as Hollywood might emphasise.

Rather, this study recommends the use of expert analysis of imagery for incorporation

into simulation. Studying phenomena that occur naturally and are challenging to capture

in the laboratory requires careful review of whatever is available to replicate the environ-

ment in simulation. Attention to detail described in reports of the experiential phenome-

non, such as the physical context (i.e. was the person floating or sitting at a workstation

near a window?) as well as the mental context (i.e. was the person working really hard so

that his physiological responses were on the intense side and subsequently sat down to

look out the window? Or, was this experience encountered on a day off while relaxing?)

is important.

The mixed-reality environment (including physical structure plus simulated visuals)

allowed for the induction of AW experiences. There are, however, several limitations

involved in both the choice of this kind of simulated environment and the specific experi-

mental design that was used. These limitations (discussed in more detail in Bockelman-

Morrow, Reinerman, and Gallagher 2013) motivated a redesign of this study. For exam-

ple, one question we cannot answer with this experimental design is to what extent the

type of immersion associated with the narrative and mixed-reality aspects of this experi-

ment contributed to inducing AW experiences compared with a different type of immer-

sion in just the visuals. Accordingly, our research group designed a follow-up study that

strips away the narrative and mixed-reality components to generate an exclusively visual

immersion in simulated space settings. With this new study, we should be able to discover

whether visual stimulation alone will generate the AW experiences. Other changes in the

experimental design include moving the questionnaire segment to follow the interview in

order to avoid any priming of experiences, increasing our sample size to make

Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 15

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bru

ce B

. Jan

z] a

t 06:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

correlations more reliable, conducting the phenomenological interview in the same space

where the simulation occurred to facilitate the participant’s reporting, and introducing a

control condition based on pure geometrical shapes which move in the same dynamic pat-

tern as the visual space-related simulation.

Even with the limitations noted, the parameters used in our mixed-reality environment

and the details of the simulation design are useable for entertainment and educational pur-

poses, such as a museum exhibit, or for familiarising someone with the look and feel of a

space vehicle and what it might be like to look back at the earth, as preparation for com-

mercial space flight. Accordingly, such techniques, extrapolated, are useful for creating

entertainment environments that invoke a new level of affective states, preparing com-

mercial space flight passengers so that their entire belief systems are not jolted during

their first flight to space, and training astronauts for long duration space missions to be

prepared for a number of ‘inner space’ events that might occur so far from home.

Acknowledgements

The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not beinterpreted as representing the official views or policies, either expressed or implied, by the JohnTempleton Foundation.

Funding

This work was supported by the John Templeton Foundation [grant number 23733].

Notes

1. Space, Science, and Spirituality (http://www.chdr.cah.ucf.edu/spaceandspirituality/) is aresearch project supported by a 2-year grant from the John Templeton Foundation. It is a col-laboration among researchers from a number of disciplines, including simulation science, psy-chology, neuroscience, and philosophy, and from a number of different institutions: TheInstitute of Simulation and Training and the Philosophy Department at the University of Cen-tral Florida, the Philosophy Department at the University of Memphis, and the Kolleg-For-schergruppe Bildakt und Verk€orperung (College for Advanced Study of Image-act andEmbodiment) at the Humboldt University, Berlin.

2. Kolleg-Forschergruppe Bildakt und Verk€orperung (The Collegium for the Advanced Study ofPicture Act and Embodiment) at the Humboldt University. The term Bildakt (image-act)derives from the work of Horst Bredekamp, Director of the Bildakt group. It should be under-stood in a way similar to the concept ‘speech-act’. It involves the interdisciplinary study ofhow we use images, what images do for us, and what they do to us. See http://bildakt-verkoer-perung.de/.

About the authors

Shaun Gallagher is the Lillian and Morrie Moss Professor of Excellence in Philosophy at theUniversity of Memphis; a professor of philosophy and cognitive sciences at the University ofHertfordshire (UK); and a professorial fellow in philosophy at the University of Wollongong (AU).He is also an honorary professor of philosophy at the Universities of Copenhagen (Denmark) andDurham (UK), and an honorary professor of health sciences at Tromsø University (Norway). Hispublications include Phenomenology (Palgrave Macmillan, 2012); The Phenomenological Mind(with Dan Zahavi, Routledge, 2008; second edition, 2012), and How the Body Shapes the Mind(Oxford, 2005), and as an editor, The Oxford Handbook of the Self (Oxford, 2011). He is theeditor-in-chief of the journal Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences.

16 S. Gallagher et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bru

ce B

. Jan

z] a

t 06:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Lauren Reinerman-Jones is an assistant research professor at the University of Central Floridawhere she has gained an extensive experience working with ARL, NRC, ONR, NAWCTSD,AFOSR, DoT, Florida Hospital, and the John Templeton Foundation. Her research centres on usingphysiological measures (EEG, ECG, TCD, fNIR, and eye tracking) for understanding, improving,and predicting human performance. She is the founder and CEO of DUJO, which applies cutting-edge science for skill assessment and improvement. Lauren has published and presented internation-ally in the fields of psychology, engineering, philosophy, and business. She serves on the editorialboard of Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science (TIES) and previously as the HFES AugmentedCognition Technical Group Chair and on the HFES Board of Executive Officers.

Brandon Sollins graduated Suma Cum Laude with a BS in psychology from the University ofCentral Florida (UCF). He joined the ACTIVE Lab in the summer of 2011 and is currently workingunder Dr Reinerman-Jones. Currently, he is pursuing his PhD in modelling and simulation at UCF.His research focuses on statistical approaches for analysing complex datasets such as those fromEEG, ECG, TCD, fNIR, and eye tracking.

Bruce Janz is a professor and the chair in the Department of Philosophy at the University of CentralFlorida (UCF), and the director of the CAH Center for Humanities and Digital Research. He hasbeen at UCF since 2003, and has been the chair of the philosophy department since 2008.Previously, he was at Augustana University College (now the Augustana Faculty of University ofAlberta), Alberta, Canada. He received his PhD degree from the University of Waterloo in Canada.He has taught in Canada, the USA, Kenya, and South Africa.

References

Bockelman-Morrow, P., L. Reinerman, and S. Gallagher. 2013. “Methodological Lessons in Neuro-phenomenology: Review of a Baseline Study and Recommendations for Research Approach-es.” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 7: 608. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00608

Cacioppo, J.T., and R.E. Petty. 1982. “The Need for Cognition.” Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology 42 (1): 116–131.

Coltheart, M. 1981. “The MRC Psycholinguistic Database Quarterly.” Journal of ExperimentalPsychology 33A: 497–505.

Fellbaum, C., ed. 1998.WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. Cambridge: MIT Press.Gadamer, H.-G. 1989. Truth and Method. 2nd ed. London: Sheed and Ward.Gallagher, S., and J. Brøsted Sørensen. 2006. “Experimenting with Phenomenology.” Conscious-

ness and Cognition 15 (1): 119–134.Graesser, A.C., D.S. McNamara, M.M. Louwerse, and Z. Cai. 2004. “Coh-Metrix: Analysis of Text

on Cohesion and Language.” Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 36:193–202.

Kennedy, R.S., N.E. Lane, K.S. Berbaum, and M.G. Lilienthal. 1993. “Simulator Sickness Ques-tionnaire: An Enhanced Method for Quantifying Simulator Sickness.” International Journal ofAviation Psychology 3 (3): 203–220.

Kramer L.A., A.E. Sargsyan, K.M. Hasan, J.D. Polk, and D.R. Hamilton. 2012. “Orbital and Intra-cranial Effects of Microgravity: Findings at 3-T MR Imaging.” Radiology 263 (3): 819–827.

Lutz, A. 2002. “Toward a Neurophenomenology as an Account of Generative Passages: A FirstEmpirical Case Study.” Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 1: 133–167.

Lutz, A., J.-P. Lachaux, J. Martinerie, and F.J. Varela. 2002. “Guiding the Study of Brain DynamicsUsing First-Person Data: Synchrony Patterns Correlate with On-Going Conscious States Duringa Simple Visual Task.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 99: 1586–1591.

Mader, T.H., C.R. Gibson, A.F. Pass, L.A. Kramer, A.G. Lee, J. Fogarty, W.J. Tarver, et al. 2011.“Optic Disc Edema, Globe Flattening, Choroidal Folds, and Hyperopic Shifts Observed inAstronauts After Long-Duration Space Flight.” Ophthalmology 118 (10): 2058–2069.

Masters, K.S., K.B. Carey, S.A. Maisto, P.E. Caldwell, T.V. Wolfe, H.L. Hackney, C.R. France, andL. Himawan. 2009. “Psychometric Examination of the Brief Multidimensional Measure of Reli-giousness/Spirituality Among College Students.” International Journal for the Psychology ofReligion 19: 106–120.

Mclain, D.L. 1993. “The Mstat-I: A New Measure of an Individual’s Tolerance for Ambiguity.”Educational and Psychological Measurement 53: 183–189.

Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 17

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bru

ce B

. Jan

z] a

t 06:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Miller, G.A, R. Beckwith, C. Fellbaum, D. Gross, and K. Miller. 1990. Five Papers on WordNet.Report No. 43. Princeton, NJ: Cognitive Science Laboratory, Princeton University.

Petitmengin, C. 2006. “Describing One’s Subjective Experience in the Second Person: An InterviewMethod for the Science of Consciousness.” Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 5: 229–269.

Reinerman-Jones, L.E., B. Sollins, S. Gallagher, and B. Janz (2013). “Neurophenomenology: AnIntegrated Approach to Exploring Awe and Wonder.” South African Journal of Philosophy 32(4): 295–309.

Tellegen, A., and G. Atkinson, 1974. “Openness to Absorbing and Self-Altering Experiences(‘Absorption’), a Trait Related to Hypnotic Susceptibility.” Journal of Abnormal Psychology83: 268–277.

Varela, F. 1996. “Neurophenomenology: A Methodological Remedy for the Hard Problem.” Jour-nal of Consciousness Studies 3: 330–349.

18 S. Gallagher et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bru

ce B

. Jan

z] a

t 06:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

14

Appendix. Consensus categories

Consensus categories

Frequency in astronautreports (51 reports, c.

23,000 words)

Frequency in post-simulationinterviews (19 interviews; c.

37,500 words)

Aesthetic appreciation 17 14Captured by view/ drawn to

phenomenon6 3

Change (internal, physical) 3 0Connectedness, feelings of 2 8Contentment 1 22Interest/inquisitiveness 7 22Disorientation 3 8Dream-like 2 4Elation 2 0Emotion (general) 3 2Experience-hungry (wanting more,

setting up to have experience)4 6

Floating (bodily - related toweightlessness)

6 1

Floating in void (not related toweightlessness)

4 6

Fulfillment 2 2Home, feeling of being at. . . 3 8Inspired [reflective] 3 18Intellectual appreciation 4 7Joy 3 3Nostalgia 3 5Overwhelmed 11 7Perspectival change (spatial) 10 16Perspectival shift (moral, internal) 4 42Peace 3 6Pleasure 3 3Poetic expression 9 1Responsibility (towards others) 3 4Significant sensory experience (visual,

silence)6 21

Sensory overload 7 11Surprise 7 2Unity with (feeling of oneness with;

holistic feeling)8 0

Unity of external (the earth, universe,people on earth)

7 1

Sublime 1 1Totality (wholeness of what is

experienced)1 6

Scale effects (feelings of vastness ofuniverse; feeling of smallness/insignificance within the vast)

7 22

Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 19

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bru

ce B

. Jan

z] a

t 06:

45 3

0 Ja

nuar

y 20

14