## Designing Beyond Current Conceptualizations of Spaceflight Experiences

James Cole School of Behavioral and Brain Sciences The University of Texas at Dallas Dallas, TX, USA james@jamescole.info

## Kathryn Hays

Department of Information University of North Texas Denton, TX, USA Kathryn.Hays@unt.edu

Ruth West Department of Design University of North Texas Denton, TX, USA Ruth.West@unt.edu

## ABSTRACT

## 1 SPACEFLIGHT AND A DIVERSE PUBLIC

The potential future democratization of spaceflight reveals a need for design of experiences that extend beyond our current conceptualization  of  spaceflight.  Research  on  career  astronauts indicates that transformative experiences occur during spaceflight despite  the  physiological  and  psychological  stressors  involved. This  phenomenon  allows  us  to  envision  a  future  where  such profound experiences are accessible to diverse spaceflight participants. In this position paper, we advocate for acknowledging  how  design  decisions  made  at  the  genesis  of commercial  spaceflight  might  impact  space  travelers  of  this speculative  future.  In  proposing  salutogenesis  as  an  orienting topic, a potential design framework, and as a metric for spaceflight participant experience, we offer a call to action for the broader experience design community to engage with the design of profound experiences for spaceflight participants.

## CCS CONCEPTS

- · Human-centered  computing  →  Human  computer  interaction (HCI)

## KEYWORDS

Commercial  space  tourism,  Spaceflight  participant,  Passenger experience, Human-Centered design

## ACM Reference format:

James  Cole,  Kathryn  Hays,  and  Ruth  West.  2023.  Designing  Beyond Current Conceptualizations of Spaceflight Experiences. In SpaceCHI 3.0: A  Conference  on  Human-Computer  Interaction  for  Space  Exploration, June 22-23, 2023, Cambridge, MA. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 4 pages.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom  use  is  granted  without  fee  provided  that  copies  are  not  made  or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the  full  citation  on  the  first  page.  Copyrights  for  third-party  components  of  this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the owner/author(s).

SpaceCHI 3.0, June 22-23, 2023, Cambridge, MA, USA

© 2023 Copyright held by the owner/author(s).

Expansion of the commercial spaceflight industry is accelerating, with  highly  publicized  flights  from  operators  such  as  SpaceX, Blue Origin [24], and Virgin Galactic (that identifies itself as the 'world's first commercial spaceline' with the purpose of 'connecting people across the globe… to space travel') [25]. Blue Origin flight participants span tech moguls, prior space exploration personnel from the International Space Station (ISS), and celebrities [14]. Acknowledging this acceleration and pointing towards  a  future  democratization  of  spaceflight,  the  FAA  no longer designates individuals as astronauts [23] and instead offers recognition of human spaceflight participants [26]. While potentially  a  distant  and  speculative  future,  these  flights  capture the popular imagination and envision the possibility for members of  a  broad  and  diverse  public  to  experience  spaceflight.  This reveals  a  need  to  develop  approaches  for  designing  experiences that would  take  place  both  beyond  our  lifetime  and  current conceptualization of spaceflight. Design of commercial spaceflight  for  a  diverse  public  may  require  the  development  of equally diverse methods. Our work asks: What kinds of experience design approaches can inform the future development of commercial spaceflight for a broad and diverse public?

Researchers and experience designers utilize a range of methods  to  understand  and  design  for  real  world  and  virtual experiences,  including  spaceflight  contexts.  Florom-Smith  [4:2] notes that the proprietary nature of psychological assessments and training for commercial spaceflight operators may prevent accurate gauges  of commercial  spaceflight  participant (SFP) safety.  Applying  experience  design  methods  to  the  design  of future commercial spaceflight requires the development of open, data-driven  approaches  that  parallel  the  methods  derived  from studies of career astronauts. While  research  conducted  with astronauts provides an understanding of design for physiological and psychological well-being during spaceflight, this knowledge may  not  fully  generalize  to  the  design  of  future  spaceflight experiences  driven  by  SFPs'  goals,  such  as  the  opportunity  to experience awe and the ability to 'look down at the Earth from space' [11:45] or goals as yet to be envisioned.

We propose steps towards experience design for the comfort and  care  of  commercial  spaceflight  participants,  not  only  the

mitigation  of  physiological  and  psychological  risk,  but  also  an understanding of the human experience writ large in these future contexts. We propose the concept of salutogenesis as an orienting topic, a potential design framework, and as a metric for a holistic SFP  experience, with the potential to complement  existing methods that optimize safety and wellness. Below, we offer a call to action for the broader experience design community to engage with the design of profound experiences for SFPs.

## 2 DESIGNING FOR A NEW KIND OF SPACE TRAVELER

Early  human  spaceflight  missions  (1961-1970)  were  relatively short in length, limited to only a few days, which minimized the impact  of  adverse  psychological  conditions  [6:5].  From  19711984, missions that only lasted a few weeks began to extend to several  months.  In  1987,  the  first  mission  lasting  one  year  was conducted successfully. As long-duration missions became more commonplace,  including  those  aboard  the  ISS,  the  need  for behavioral  health  support  for  astronauts  became  increasingly apparent  [15:124].  Today,  behavioral  health  programs,  such  as NASA's Behavioral  Health  and  Performance  Group,  draw  from more  than  60  years  of  human  spaceflight  experience  to  provide psychological support for astronauts as they adapt to the stressors of  living  and  working  in  space  [27].  Among  the  psychological stressors  characteristic  of  spaceflight  are  isolation,  confinement, danger, monotony, and workload [6:2].

Since  existing  research  on  the  psychology  of  spaceflight  has been conducted on homogeneous groups of highly-trained astronauts,  little  is  known  about  the  psychological  effects  of spaceflight on SFPs [12:882,16:1053]. Maximizing the safety and enjoyment  of  SFPs  will  require  the  creation  of  psychological evaluations  and  training  protocols  specific  to  commercial  space vehicles  and  experiences,  but  no  plans  of  this  sort  are  currently published  [4:6-7].  Ligor  et  al.  [8:2]  notes  how  treating  existing safety practices as proprietary information limits the development of  consensus  standards  for  commercial  human  spaceflight,  and stresses  the  importance  of  collaboration  between  government, academia,  and  industry  in  the  development  of  standards.  Since 1998,  cooperation  of  this  kind  has  occurred  between  the  five space agencies represented on the ISS in their effort to implement standard behavioral health programs for ISS crews [15:122-123]. Similar policies of openness and collaboration within the commercial spaceflight sector may enable the creation of standard tools and methods for responding to adverse psychological states in SFPs.

The prevalence of anxiety related to air travel, such as fear of flying (FOF),  is around  20%  within  the  general  population [12:883].  Despite  the  likelihood  that  conditions  like  FOF  will impact space operations, the FAA offers no specific recommendations for protecting SFP psychological health beyond keeping  'stress  at  levels  that  can  be  considered  safe  for  space flight participants' [28:4]. Designing experiences for SFPs requires a deeper understanding of the psychological stressors of spaceflight that are unique to this demographic. FOF  and centrifugation studies demonstrate how simulations can be used to elicit stressors analogous to those encountered during spaceflight [12:882].  However,  as  of  2019,  few  studies  investigated  the effects of centrifugation on SFPs [16:1057], limiting the generalizability of the findings. The expansion of spaceflight to a diverse public makes investigations into the psychological stressors  and  formulation  of  countermeasures  paramount  to  the design of optimal experiences [4:7]. Human-computer interaction (HCI) researchers and user experience (UX) designers, trained to apply  insights  of  human  behavior  in  the  design  of  technology, could be ideal collaborators in these investigations.

## 3 BEYOND EXISTING DESIGN APPROACHES

The  integration  of  psychology  and  interaction  design  has  an established history in aerospace applications. During World War II, work  from  human  factors  pioneers, like Paul Fitts and Alphonse  Chapanis,  to  reduce  the  number  of  plane  crashes through the design of more usable aircraft controls highlights the significance of mapping designs to human needs [7:80-87]. Since then, governmental space programs like NASA  have  made significant strides in understanding and securing the physiological safety  of  humans  outside  the  bounds  of  Earth's  atmosphere. Beginning  at  the  conceptual  phase  of  system  design,  NASA's Human  Systems  Integration  (HSI)  practitioners  factor  human capabilities, limitations, roles, and responsibilities into the design of hardware and software systems [19:1-1,20:21].

HCI  researchers  and  UX  designers  employ  various  design frameworks to center user needs within the design process so that action can be oriented towards addressing specific needs from the start.  Design  frameworks,  like  the  Double  Diamond  [21]  and Design  Thinking  [3],  enable  structured  approaches  for  solving design  challenges.  They  require  that  problems  be  defined  in specific enough terms so that actions can be taken to solve them. Frameworks  are  not  intended  to  be  limiting  or  prescriptive,  but instead offer ways to visualize how decisions made throughout the design  process  affect the outcome  [17:126].  The  four-phase Double  Diamond  process  from  the  British  Design  Council  [21] identifies  user  needs  during  the discovery phase.  Similarly,  the Design  Thinking  framework  addresses  user  needs  within  the empathize phase,  during  which  designers  categorize  the  needs identified  during  user  research  along  a  matrix  of  what  the  user says,  thinks,  feels,  and  does  [3].  Human-centered  design,  with  a history of use at NASA [19:20], represents yet another method for incorporating user perspectives into the design process to develop effective systems  [22].  Each  of  these  processes  requires  an understanding of the contexts in which specific users interact with a  design,  incorporates  users  into  the  design  process,  develops prototypes, and refines the design through testing and iteration.

Commercial  spaceflight  operators  are  already  applying  usercentered design methods to the creation of user interfaces for crew controls within vehicles. For example,  the touchscreen  user interfaces  found  in  the  SpaceX  Crew  Dragon  spacecraft  were validated by user testing with a diverse set of participants. These

Designing Beyond Current Conceptualizations of Spaceflight Experiences efforts  enabled  the  design  of  UI  controls  that  account  for  crew members'  gloved  hands  and  words  that  are  legible  despite  the high  vibrations  users  would  encounter  during  flight  [9].  The design  of  systems  intended  for  passenger  interaction  should  be informed  by  similar  observations  of  user  needs  and  behaviors contextualized within the SFP experience.

Bernard et  al.  [2]  proposes  the  people,  environment,  actions, and  resources  (PEAR)  model  to  identify  the  human  factors  of passenger experience that designers should consider in regards to spaceflight  contexts.  The  PEAR  model  enables  the  design  to center on specific details which are important to each stakeholder in  a  commercial  spaceflight  experience,  crew  and  passengers alike. Addressing the future of space tourism and SFPs, Bernard acknowledges that work is needed to go beyond existing design approaches,  and  actively  engage  human  factors  and  experience design  teams  in  developing  the  nascent  space  tourism  industry. Here we  concur, researchers working with user experience designers are well positioned to apply insights of human behavior in  the  design  of  commercial  space  flight  experiences.  Extending the focus of research and design beyond risk mitigation and safety concerns enables interdisciplinary teams to consider the comfort and care of SFPs and the potential to design profound experiences.  Below  we  discuss  one  possible  avenue  for  this engagement.

## 4 SALUTOGENESIS: A DRIVER FOR EXPERIENCE DESIGN

Astronauts  perform  mission-critical  tasks  while  simultaneously adapting  to  the  stressors  of  space.  Any  cognitive  performance decrements, including those caused by diminished psychological well-being, pose risks to both safety and mission success [6:2-3]. Psychological  assessments  and  training  protocols,  designed  with data collected throughout the course of human  spaceflight programs, prepare astronauts to adapt to the extreme environments  in  which  they  operate.  Similarly,  identification  of the psychological factors specific to commercial  spaceflight participation will enable the development of innovative screening tools, training protocols, and in-flight technologies geared towards reducing  the  impact  of  negative  psychological  events  during spaceflight for SFPs.  However,  operational  models  designed around the needs of astronauts may not be entirely suited for the needs  of  SFPs.  Furthermore,  existing  research  on  spaceflight psychology centers mostly on the risks of adverse psychological conditions  and  less  is  known  about  'the  potential  behavioral health  benefits  of  space  travel'  [6:135,18:2].  Design  approaches that emphasize risk mitigation to the exclusion of other psychologically  salient  phenomena  may  miss  an  opportunity  to deliver holistic experiences that elevate the positive psychological aspects of human spaceflight.

Mittelmark &amp; Bauer [10] assert that positive psychology and salutogenesis  are  conceptually  consonant  despite  differences  in terminology.  Salutogenesis  embodies  a  continuum  of  well-being [1:12-37], with a focus on the enhancement of health and well- being through a sense of coherence between stressors and one's lived  experience  [5].  Powerful  and  challenging  experiences  can enhance or bring about well-being [6:135]. Coherence emerges as the integration of comprehensibility, manageability, and meaningfulness  of  stressors gives rise to the transformative experience of salutogenesis [10].

Ritsher et al. [13] highlights how salutogenesis resulting from adaptation to the extreme environment of space can produce both temporary  and  lasting  benefits.  Post-mission  surveys  and  other data collected from career astronauts indicate a universally positive  reaction  to  being  in  space,  noting  changes  such  as  'an enhanced  appreciation  for  the  beauty  and  fragility  of  Earth' [6:138].  The  overview  effect,  an  intense  feeling  experienced  by viewing the Earth from above that is often reported by astronauts, is among the factors that may lead to salutogenesis [18:7]. Other positive  factors  associated  with  the  environmental  and  social contexts of spaceflight converge  to  generate  these  profound experiences, such as membership in elite groups, changed values, and  self-confidence  [15:121-122].  Maximizing  the  potential  for salutogenesis can offset the risks posed by negative psychological events that manifest during spaceflight [13:1].

Existing approaches to passenger experience hint at the attention that may be directed towards positive emotional considerations  as  commercial  human  spaceflight  evolves.  For instance,  Virgin  Galactic's  marketing  materials  describe  their hope  that experiencing  the overview  effect will intensify a passenger's  'connection  to  Earth  and  to  humanity'  [29:1,  13]. Using salutogenesis as a metric in experience design could offer a benchmark  for  evaluating  the  affective  qualities  of  spaceflight experiences more comprehensively. HCI  professionals could collaborate with industry, academia, and multidisciplinary entities to define both the negative and positive psychological aspects of commercial spaceflight experiences. Individual goals, like producing the overview effect, could be included in this holistic interpretation of passenger experience. This can inform the creation  of  training  protocols  and  simulations  optimized  for  the needs of SFPs, enable the development of technological countermeasures for responding to adverse psychological conditions, and maximize the potential for generating salutogenic experiences during spaceflight.

The inherently human yet transformative nature of salutogenic experiences makes them candidates for accessing the underlying components of speculative  and  envisioned  future  experiences  of spaceflight.  In  this  paper  we  advocate  for  a  discourse  towards salutogenic  experience  design  for  SFPs.  Focusing  design  efforts on the factors that lead to salutogenesis could serve to both lessen the impact of adverse psychological conditions during spaceflight and enable the design of profound experiences for SFPs.

## 5 CALL TO ACTION

Although this paper describes a speculative future, the democratization  of  space  demands  that  we  acknowledge  how design  decisions  made  at  the  genesis  of  this  industry  impact

people who do not yet have access or who may not yet exist. How are  we  as  researchers  and  user  experience  designers  to  design commercial spaceflight as a holistic experience? If what we know about designing for the care and comfort of spaceflight participants comes from research on career astronauts, or proprietary information with limited access, how are we to have a broader dialogue inclusive of the diverse voices of those who may participate in the future of spaceflight?

The  ideas  presented  here  are  intended  to  provide  a  starting point. They encourage the broader experience design community to engage with the design of profound experiences for SFPs. They propose  salutogenesis  as  an  orienting  topic,  a  potential  design framework, and as a metric for SFP experiences, complementing existing  methods  used  to  optimize  human  safety  and  expanding focus  from  solely  risk  mitigation  towards  transformative  and profound spaceflight participant experiences.

## ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank Christopher Lueg for his generous comments on drafts of this paper.

## REFERENCES

- [1] Aaron Antonovsky. 1979. Health, stress, and coping. New perspectives on mental and physical well-being .
- [2] Tiziano  Bernard,  Yash  Mehta,  Brandon  Cuffie,  Yassine  Rayad,  Sebastien Boulnois, and Lucas Stephane. 2020. Considerations for Passenger Experience in Space Tourism. In Advances in Human Factors of Transportation , Neville  Stanton  (ed.).  Springer  International  Publishing, Cham, 807-818. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20503-4\_72
- [3] World  Leaders  in  Research-Based  User  Experience.  2017.  UX  Mapping Methods Compared: A Cheat Sheet. Nielsen Norman Group . Retrieved May 2, 2023 from https://www.nngroup.com/articles/ux-mapping-cheat-sheet/
- [4] Aubrey  L.  Florom-Smith,  J.  Karen  Klingenberger,  and  Cathy  P.  DiBiase. 2022.  Commercial  space  tourism:  An  integrative  review  of  spaceflight participant  psychological  assessment  and  training. REACH 25-26,  (March 2022), 100043. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reach.2021.100043
- [5] Jacek Hochwälder. 2019. Sense of Coherence: Notes on Some Challenges for  Future  Research. SAGE  Open 9,  2  (April  2019),  2158244019846687. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019846687
- [6] Nick Kanas and Dietrich Manzey. 2008. Space psychology and psychiatry, 2nd ed .  Springer Science + Business Media, New York, NY; El Segundo, CA.
- [7] Cliff  Kuang  and  Robert  Fabricant.  2019. User  friendly:  how  the  hidden rules of design are changing the way we live, work, and play (First edition ed.). MCD/Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York.
- [8] Douglas  C  Ligor,  Benjamin  M  Miller,  Maria  McCollester,  Brian  Phillips, Geoffrey Kirkwood, Josh Becker, Gwen Mazzotta, Bruce McClintock, and Barbara Bicksler. Assessing the Readiness for Human Commercial Spaceflight  Safety  Regulations:  Charting  a  Trajectory  from  Revolutionary to Routine Travel --Summary. Retrieved from https://www.rand.org/pubs/research\_reports/RRA2466-1.html
- [9] Oliver Lindberg. 2022. How UX Design Fuels Space Exploration at NASA &amp; SpaceX | Adobe. Adobe Blog . Retrieved May 2, 2023 from https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2022/01/20/ux-in-space-the-role-ofhuman-centered-design-in-space-exploration
- [10] Maurice  B.  Mittelmark  and  Georg  F.  Bauer.  2017.  The  Meanings  of Salutogenesis. In The Handbook of Salutogenesis ,  Maurice B. Mittelmark, Shifra  Sagy,  Monica  Eriksson,  Georg  F.  Bauer,  Jürgen  M.  Pelikan,  Bengt Lindström  and  Geir  Arild  Espnes  (eds.).  Springer,  Cham  (CH).  Retrieved May 3, 2023 from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK435854/
- [11] Kazuhiko  Momose,  Troy  R.  Weekes,  and  Thomas  C.  Eskridge.  2023. Human-Centered Design for Spaceflight Participant Safety and Experience: A Case Study of Blue Origin Suborbital Flight. New Space 11,  1  (March 2023), 44-57. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1089/space.2021.0029
- [12] Robert  A.  Mulcahy,  Rebecca  S.  Blue,  Johnené  L.  Vardiman,  Tarah  L. Castleberry, and James M. Vanderploeg. 2016. Screening and Mitigation of Layperson  Anxiety  in  Aerospace  Environments. Aerospace  Medicine  and Human Performance 87, 10 (October 2016), 882-889. DOI:https://doi.org/10.3357/AMHP.4536.2016

| [13]   | J. B. Ritsher, N. A. Kanas, E. C. Ihle, and S. A. Saylor. 2007. Psychological adaptation and salutogenesis in space: Lessons from a series of studies. Acta Astronautica 60, 4 (February 2007), 336-340. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2006.09.002                                                                                               |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| [14]   | William Shatner. 2022. William Shatner: My Trip to Space Filled Me With 'Overwhelming Sadness' (EXCLUSIVE). Variety . Retrieved May 3, 2023 from https://variety.com/2022/tv/news/william-shatner-space-boldly-go- excerpt-1235395113/                                                                                                                     |
| [15]   | Walter E. Sipes, Kelley J. Slack, and Gary E. Beven. 2020. Behavioral Health in ICE Environments: Process and Countermeasures for NASA Astronauts. In Psychology and Human Performance in Space Programs: Extreme Application (1st ed.), Lauren Blackwell Landon, Kelley J. Slack and Eduardo Salas (eds.). CRC Press, 1st edition. | Boca Raton, FL : CRC |
| [16]   | Jan Stepanek, Rebecca S. Blue, and Parazynski Scott. 2019. Space Medicine in the Era of Civilian Spaceflight. The New England Journal of Medicine 380, 11 (March 2019), 1053-1060. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1609012                                                                                                                               |
| [17]   | Marc Stickdorn and Jakob Schneider. 2011. This is Service Design Thinking: Basics, Tools, Cases . Wiley, Hoboken, New Jersey.                                                                                                                                                                                                                              |
| [18]   | David Yaden, Jonathan Iwry, Kelley Slack, Johannes Eichstaedt, Yukun Zhao, George Vaillant, and Andrew Newberg. 2016. The Overview Effect: Awe and Self-Transcendent Experience in Space Flight. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice 3, (March 2016), 1-11. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1037/cns0000086                                 |
| [19]   | Jennifer Rochlis Zumbado. 2015. Human Systems Integration (HSI) Practitioner's Guide. Retrieved May 11, 2023 from https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20150022283/downloads/20150022283.pd f                                                                                                                                                               |
| [20]   | 2014. Human Integration Design Handbook. Retrieved May 11, 2023 from https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/human_integration_desi                                                                                                                                                                                                           |
| [21]   | gn_handbook_revision_1.pdf 2019. Framework for Innovation: Design Council's evolved Double Diamond. Framework for Innovation . Retrieved May 1, 2023 from https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/our-work/skills-learning/tools- frameworks/framework-for-innovation-design-councils-evolved-double- diamond/                                                    |
| [22]   | 2019. ISO 9241-210 Ergonomics of human-system interaction -Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems. Retrieved May 4, 2023 from https://www.iso.org/standard/77520.html                                                                                                                                                                      |
| [23]   | 2022. Human Spaceflight | Federal Aviation Administration. Retrieved May 3, 2023 from https://www.faa.gov/space/human_spaceflight                                                                                                                                                                                                                          |
| [24]   | 2023. Fly to Space. Blue Origin . Retrieved May 3, 2023 from https://www.blueorigin.com/new-shepard/fly                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    |
| [25]   | 2023. Virgin Galactic. Retrieved May 3, 2023 from https://www.virgingalactic.com/                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          |
| [26]   | FAA Commercial Human Spaceflight Recognition | Federal Aviation Administration. Retrieved May 3, 2023 from https://www.faa.gov/space/human_spaceflight/recognition                                                                                                                                                                                         |
| [27]   | NASA: 60 Years & Counting - Human Spaceflight. NASA . Retrieved May 10, 2023 from https://www.nasa.gov/specials/60counting/spaceflight.html                                                                                                                                                                                                                |
| [28]   | Recommended Practices for Human Space Flight Occupant Safety. Retrieved from https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/2022- 04/recommended_practices_for_hsf_occupant_safety-version_1-tc14- 0037.pdf                                                                                                                                                       |
| [29]   | Virgin Galactic Spaceflight Brochure. Retrieved May 14, 2023 from https://assets.ctfassets.net/vsp83h9pnr7f/5KiiXophMVOuy2GLnoWbSv/20 08e962ef57e7c21f4ba33fc0e81806/Virgin_Galactic_Brochure_Web.pdf                                                                                                                                                      |
James Cole Kathryn Hays Ruth West
Designing Beyond Current Conceptualizations of Spaceflight Experiences
The potential future democratization of spaceflight reveals a need for design
of experiences that extend beyond our current conceptualization of spaceflight.
Research on career astronauts indicates that transformative experiences occur
during spaceflight despite the physiological and psychological stressors
involved. This phenomenon allows us to envision a future where such profound
experiences are accessible to diverse spaceflight participants. In this
position paper, we advocate for acknowledging how design decisions made at the
genesis of commercial spaceflight might impact space travelers of this
speculative future. In proposing salutogenesis as an orienting topic, a
potential design framework, and as a metric for spaceflight participant
experience, we offer a call to action for the broader experience design
community to engage with the design of profound experiences for spaceflight
participants.