Pointlessly specific research
I can understand how simulations and models like this can help us understand group dynamics on Earth. Think "why does everyone end up hating this guy, and not the one with the clear asshole personality". But the methods are woefully inadequate for trying to accomplish what the authors set as their contributions:
- To understand social interactions of Mars base occupants: the personality types they chose are extremely generic, while no agency will send average joes up there.
- To consider planning challenges for a Mars colony: until we have solved the thousands of technical considerations, it is pointless to plan the social structure. Social life on Mars will be dominated by the technical constraints imposed on the occupants: space, facilities, schedules. Chain of command would be interesting to investigate, but they did not really go there.
- To propose minimum colony size: this is again dictated by technical requirements, which the authors guessed at. How much weight can you take there in one go and how long does it need to last.
In reality, any extra occupants over the first one that you need for bragging rights will be decided from a cost-benefit perspective, and then the social considerations will be solved "as well as possible" within the group, mostly by training and observing different crews on earth in actual, physical simulation environment. One guy won't do, if he gets sick, you are screwed. Two for redundancy. Three only if it's cheaper/safer (the two are largely exchangeable) to have a third high-maintenance low duty cycle low power universal tool (a human) rather than a set of highly specific robots / machines. There will not be an "indefinite" presence on Mars, it is going to be basically a space station like the ISS but in an extremely inconvenient location.