FUTURE SELECTION OF AQUANAUTS 199 



Experience may show that either more or fewer steps are necessary.) The steps recommended 

 in the order of their application are: 



1. A call for volunteers 



2. An assessment of the training and experience of each volunteer 



3. Standardized ratings of the man by instructors and supervisors 



4. Similar ratings by his peers 



5. Use of the present criteria 



6. A physical examination 



7. Selection during training 



It should be pointed out that all factors in selection outlined above, except the present cri- 

 teria, and peer ratings, were probably used, albeit informally, in selecting the team for Sea- 

 lab 11. By this it is meant that, since the candidates were selected on the basis of personal 

 knowledge of leaders of the program, it is assumed that reputation and past record played the 

 major role in selection. For future operations involving potentially large numbers of men, 

 personal acquaintance may not suffice. Therefore an attempt to standardize, formalize, and 

 evaluate selection procedures should be the aim of a future selection program. Let us examine 

 each of the above steps. 



Call for Volunteers 



It may be self-evident that men taking part in a hazardous or specialized program will be 

 volunteers. Nevertheless, the fact that they are volunteers can play an important role in se- 

 lection. Careful attention should be given to a complete and realistic portrayal of the opportu- 

 nities and dangers involved to insure the recruitment of informed and properly motivated 

 candidates. 



Assessment Based on Training and Experience 



Presumably men applying as aquanauts will have had some training as divers, although it 

 is possible that this may not always be the case. Assuming that the applicant has attended div- 

 ing school, the level of his training and his grades should be considered as factors in selection. 

 Conduct and proficiency ratings should be considered, particularly when they comment on a 

 man's work as a diver. However, the validity of this information should be examined carefully 

 for two reasons. First, proficiency ratings may be based largely on work having little to do 

 with diving. Second, the most successful aquanauts may not necessarily be men who have the 

 best conduct reports. This mildly heretical suggestion is supported by the lack of correlation 

 between measures of both juvenile and adult misconduct and performance in Sealab 11. It is 

 quite possible that excellent aquanauts may be found among the ranks of those who occasionally 

 "kick over the traces." Some men volunteering for a program like Sealab may crave excite- 

 ment and adventure and thus may have some minor blemishes on their conduct records. The 

 lack of correlation between measures of misconduct and performance in Sealab does not mean 

 that men should be selected who have been in trouble occasionally; rather, it means that infor- 

 mation concerning misconduct may be of no use as a selection factor. 



Ratings by Instructors and Supervisors 



In addition to assessing a man's past performance, specific ratings of his work as a diver 

 by those who have supervised him in this work should be useful in selection. Letters of rec- 

 ommendation are notoriously biased toward favorable comments. In its highly successful se- 

 lection program, the Peace Corps has developed an apparently useful correction for such biases. 



