The concept of habitability is a vague one. The dictionary defines habitable 

 as "fit to live in". Another working definition that has been found useful 

 indicates that habitability is the perception of the quality of life in a 

 specific environment. How well individuals confined within a space can fulfill 

 their mission defines perceived life quality. Habitability^ therefore, is a 

 function of the interaction between (I) the patterns of requirements for mission 

 fulfillment, life support, and psycho-social maintenance, and (2) the physical 

 and temporal characteristics of the space involved. 



Since each person interprets his environment through his own cognitive system, 

 habi tabi 1 i ty cannot be consi dered as a uni t characteristicof the spatial conf i gu ra- 

 tion alone, but rather as an interactive process, differing for each individual, 

 and changing as requirements for behavior and the capability of the environment 

 to support the behavior are altered. 



Research in habitability attempts to ascertain how the goals of individuals and 

 groups interact with personal, social, physical, and temporal constraints to 

 affect the adequacy of a situation. Of particular interest in this report are 

 the physical constraints and their manipulation to help achieve habitability. 



Eventual ly^ i t may be poss i bl e to develop 1 awful relationships and crlteriawhich, 

 if applied to the design of particular habitats or situations, will produce a 

 given level of habitability. This is important because the ultimate measure of 

 habitability is the success or failure of long-duration missions. 



Objectives 



As previously stated, the ultimate aim of habitability research is the formula- 

 tion of criteria that will assist in the design and evaluation of specific, 

 isolated, work-oriented habitats. To this end, efforts were focused toward 

 answering specific questions: 



'• Can measures of habitability be developed? 



2. In improving the habitability of future space vehicles, where must 

 attention be focused; to what attributes of the physical environment 

 does a crew become sensitive over time? 



3. How important or desirable is privacy? 



4. How important is leisure time; in what kinds of activities do off-duty 

 crewmen engage? 



5. How important is food to habitability; what do crewmen enjoy and what 

 do they complain about? 



6. To what extent do work provisions influence overall attitudes toward 

 the habitat? 



7. How do crew reactions to the habitat change with increased mission 

 durat ion? 



8. How is the personality of a crewman related to his opinion of, or 

 adaptation tO;, the habitat? 



9. Do engineers and scientists view the habitat differently? 

 10. Do men and women view the habitat differently? 



VIII -69 



