The Routledge International Handbook of Military Psychology and Mental Health

“Today military commanders across the world are experiencing widespread stress and mental

health issues in their organisations. This book has outstanding psychological prescriptions for

military commanders and psychologists alike. A compelling read.”

Lt. General Dushyant Singh, Commandant,

Army War College, India

“This handbook, comprised of an international team of experts, is an extremely valuable

resource of empirical, theoretical and practical knowledge for military psychology students and

practitioners.”

Colonel (R) Reuven Gal, Ph.D., Former Chief Psychologist, Israeli Defense Forces

“This outstanding work covers important topics often overlooked in the professional literature.

Connecting theoretical concepts to practical applications, an impressive team of military

psychology experts give readers a book they will want to keep close at hand.”

Colonel (R) Bruce E. Crow, Psy.D., Former U.S. Army Chief Psychologist

“This volume is remarkable in its breadth, covering the ancient history of military psychology to

the latest developments in assisting military service members preparing for combat and preparing

to return to civilian life.”

Richard G. Tedeschi, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, University of North Carolina, USA

“A ‘must-have’ for every military psychologist, this book is a unique reference that transcends

national borders, providing solid scientic research and thoughtful ethical discussions amid a

perspective that captures the historical and prospective use of military psychology.”

Colonel (R) Sally C. Harvey, Ph.D., U.S. Army Psychologist

THE ROUTLEDGE INTERNATIONAL

HANDBOOK OF MILITARY PSYCHOLOGY

AND MENTAL HEALTH

Military psychology has become one of the world’s fastest-growing disciplines with ever-

emerging new applications of research and development. The Routledge International Handbook of

Military Psychology and Mental Health is a compendium of chapters by internationally renowned

scholars in the eld, bringing forth the state of the art in the theory, practice and future prospects

of military psychology.

This uniquely interdisciplinary volume deliberates upon the current issues and applications of

military psychology not only within the military organization and the discipline of psychology,

but also in the larger context of its role of building a better world. Split into three parts dedicated

to specic themes, the rst part of the book, “Military Psychology: The Roots and the Journey,”

provides an overview of the evolution of the discipline over the years, delving into concepts as

varied as culture and cognition in the military, a perspective on the role of military psychology

in future warfare and ethical issues. The second part, “Soldiering: Deployment and Beyond,”

considers the complexities involved in soldiering in view of the changing nature of warfare,

generating a focal discourse on various aspects of military leadership, soldier resilience and

post-traumatic growth in the face of extreme situations, bravery and character strengths and

transitioning to civilian life. In the nal section, “Making a Choice: Mental Health Issues and

Prospects in the Military,” the contributors focus on the challenges and practices involved in

maintaining the mental health of the soldier, covering issues ranging from stress, mental health and

well-being, through to suicide risk and its prevention, intervention and management strategies,

moral injury and post-traumatic stress disorder.

Incorporating enlightening contributions of eminent scholars from around the world, the

volume is a comprehensive repository of current perspectives and future directions in the domain

of military psychology. It will prove a valuable resource for mental health practitioners, military

leaders, policy-makers and academics and students across a range of disciplines.

Updesh Kumar, Ph.D., is Scientist ‘G’ and Head, Mental Health Division, Defence Institute of

Psychological Research (DIPR), Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO),

Ministry of Defence, New Delhi, India.

Routledge International Handbooks

Routledge Handbook of the Belt and Road

Edited by Cai Fang and Peter Nolan

Routledge Handbook of Language Acquisition

Edited by Jessica S. Horst and Janne von Koss Torkildsen

Routledge Handbook of Identity Studies, 2e

Edited by Anthony Elliott

Routledge International Handbook of Poverty

Edited by Bent Greve

Routledge International Handbook of New Digital Practices in Galleries,

Libraries, Archives, Museums and Heritage Sites

Edited by Hannah Lewi, Wally Smith, Dirk vom Lehn and Steven Cooke

Routledge International Handbook of Human Tracking

A Multi-Disciplinary and Applied Approach

Edited by Rochelle L. Dalla and Donna Sabella

The Routledge Handbook of Comparative Rural Policy

Edited by Matteo Vittuari, John Devlin, Marco Pagani and Thomas Johnson

Routledge International Handbook of Masculinity Studies

Edited by Lucas Gottzén, Ulf Mellström and Tamara Shefer

Routledge Handbook of European Welfare Systems, 2e

Edited by Sonja Blum, Johanna Kuhlmann and Klaus Schubert

Routledge International Handbook of Heterosexualities Studies

Edited by James Joseph Dean and Nancy L. Fischer

Routledge Handbook of Contemporary European Social Movements

Protest in Turbulent Times

Edited by Cristina Flesher Fominaya and Ramón A. Feenstra

The Routledge International Handbook of Military Psychology and Mental Health

Edited by Updesh Kumar

Routledge International Handbook of Green Criminology

Edited by Avi Brisman and Nigel South

Routledge International Handbook of Contemporary Racisms

Edited by John Solomos

The Routledge Handbook of State-Owned Enterprises

Edited by Luc Bernier, Philippe Bance and Massimo Florio

For more information about this series, please visit: www.routledge.com/

Routledge-International-Handbooks/book-series/RIHAND

THE ROUTLEDGE

INTERNATIONAL HANDBOOK

OF MILITARY PSYCHOLOGY

AND MENTAL HEALTH

Edited by

Updesh Kumar

First published 2020

by Routledge

2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN

and by Routledge

52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017

Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

individual chapters, the contributors

The right of Updesh Kumar to be identied as the author of the

editorialmaterial, and of the authors for their individual chapters, has

beenasserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright,

Designs and Patents Act 1988.

utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now

known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in

any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing

from the publishers.

Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or

registered trademarks, and are used only for identication and explanation

without intent to infringe.

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Kumar, Updesh, editor.

Title: The Routledge international handbook of military psychology and

mental health/edited by Updesh Kumar.

Description: Abingdon, Oxon; New York, NY : Routledge, 2020. | Includes

bibliographical references and index.

Identiers: LCCN 2019037539 (print) | LCCN 2019037540 (ebook) |

ISBN 9780367237073 (paperback) | ISBN 9780367237066 (hardcover) |

ISBN 9780429281266 (ebook)

Subjects: LCSH: Psychology, Military--Handbooks, manuals, etc. |

War--Psychological aspects--Handbooks, manuals, etc. |

Combat--Psychological aspects--Handbooks, manuals, etc. |

Soldiers--Mental health--Handbooks, manuals, etc.

Classication: LCC U22.3 .R68 2020 (print) | LCC U22.3 (ebook) |

DDC 355.001/9--dc23

LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019037539

LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019037540

ISBN: 978-0-367-23706-6 (hbk)

ISBN: 978-0-429-28126-6 (ebk)

Typeset in Bembo

by Nova Techset Private Limited, Bengaluru & Chennai, India

Dedicated to the Brave Soldiers of Indian Armed Forces

List of gures xiii

List of tables xv

Editor xvii

Contributors xix

Foreword xxxix

Preface xliii

PART I

Military psychology: e roots andthe journey 1

1 Military psychology in war and peace: Anappraisal 3

Swati Mukherjee and Updesh Kumar

2 War, peace and the military in Biblical and ancient Greek societies 13

Matthew B. Schwartz and Kalman J. Kaplan

3 Four stages in the evolution of military enlistment testing 39

Michael G. Rumsey

4 Polemology: Orphan of military psychology 51

Jacques J. Gouws

5 The application of culture and cognition within a military context 65

Faizan Imtiaz, Mark Khei, and Li-Jun Ji

6 Military psychology and the fourth industrial revolution: Implications

for the South African National Defence Force’s Directorate psychology 75

Petrus C. Bester

CONTENTS

Contents

7 War of the future and prospective directions of military psychology 89

Alexander G. Karayani

8 Ethical issues in military psychology: Promoting international ethical

readiness 103

Thomas E. Myers and Shane S. Bush

PART II

Soldiering: Deployment and beyond 117

9 Shaping military leaders: Role of character strengths and virtues 119

Archana, Samridhi Ahuja, and Updesh Kumar

10 Posttraumatic growth in military populations:Theory, research,

andapplication 133

K. C. Kalmbach and Bret A. Moore

11 Building resilience and hardiness in military leaders – Robustness

training programs of the German Army 151

Oliver Krueckel, Annett Heidler, Nicola von Luedinghausen,

MarkusAuschek, and Matthias Soest

12 Sustainable team leadership: Social identity and collective leadership

for military and society 165

António Palma Rosinha, Hermes de Andrade Jr,

andMarcosAguiardeSouza

13 The physical bravery study: Findings and implications for small,

innovative research studies with military/veteran populations 181

Kristen J. Vescera, Jacie Brown, Catherine Hausman, and BruceBongar

14 Military recruiting in the United States: Selection, assessment, training,

well-being, and performance coaching 195

Stephen V. Bowles, Bettina Schmid, Laurel K. Cofell Rashti,

SusanJ.Scapperotti, Tracy D. Smith, Paul T. Bartone, and Peter Mikoski

15 Validity assessment in military psychology 211

Noah K. Kaufman andShaneS. Bush

16 Reintegration and military family health: Military training and its

relationship to post-deployment role conict in intimate partner relationships 225

E. Ann Jeschke, Jessica M. LaCroix, Amber M. Fox, LauraA.Novak,

andMarjan Ghahramanlou Holloway

Contents

17 Lone wolf terrorism 243

Bruce Bongar, Anna Feinman, and Renata Sargon

18 Why do they leave? Aconceptual model of military turnover 255

H. Canan Sümer and I

pek Mete

19 Transition from military to civilian life 269

Harprit Kaur and Swati

PART III

Making a choice: Mental health issues and prospects in the military 281

20 Military burnout and work engagement: A qualitative systematic

literature review 283

Maria José Chambel, Sílvia Lopes, Filipa Castanheira,

andCarolinaRodrigues-Silveira

21 Stress, burnout and coping in the military environment 319

Yonel Ricardo de Souza and Fabio Biasotto Feitosa

22 Stress experiences and abilities to cope: Civil population versus

military personnel 333

Vijay Parkash

23 Military-related mental health morbidities: A neurobiological approach 349

Shobit Garg and Jyoti Mishra

24 Clinical health psychology applications in military settings 361

Ryaja Johnson and Larry C. James

25 Suicide prevention strategies in military populations 375

Marissa N. Eusebio, Abigale Brady, and Bruce Bongar

26 Military sexual trauma and suicidal self-directed violence: A narrative

review and proposed agenda for future research 389

Lindsey L. Monteith, Ryan Holliday, Tim Hoyt, andNazaninH.Bahraini

27 Understanding suicide among female veterans: A theory-driven approach 411

Lindsey L. Monteith, Ryan Holliday, Diana P. Brostow,

andClaireA.Homire

28 Resilience and stress in military combat ight engineers 425

Reoot Cohen-Koren, Dror Garbi, Shirley Gordon, Nirit Yavnai, Yifat Erlich

Shoham, and Leah Shelef

Contents

xii

29 Family-based psychological interventions: A heuristic approach 437

Jyoti Mishra and Shobit Garg

30 Chronic disease risks and service-related post-traumatic stress disorder

in military veterans 451

Jeanne Mager Stellman and Steven D. Stellman

31 Neurotransmitter and neurotrophic biomarkers in combat-related

posttraumatic stress disorder 467

Gordana Nedic Erjavec, Matea Nikolac Perkovic, Dubravka Svob Strac,

Lucija Tudor, and Nela Pivac

32 Neuroendocrine and immune biomarkers of posttraumatic stress

disorder in combat veterans 483

Nela Pivac, Marcela Konjevod, Marina Sagud, Suzana Uzun,

andOliverKozumplik

33 Moral injury in service members and veterans 497

Sheila Frankfurt, Alanna Coady, Breanna Grunthal,

Stephanie Ellickson-Larew, and Brett T. Litz

34 Student service members/veterans’ mental health on campus:

Riskand resources 513

Dan Nyaronga

35 Resilience and clinical issues in survival behavior under isolation

andcaptivity 523

Vasile Marineanu

Index 541

xiii

LIST OF FIGURES

0.1 Military psychology in context xxxix

6.1 The four industrial revolutions 77

7.1 The inuence of perceptions of future wars on the vision of prospective

directions of military psychology development 90

7.2 Spaces of future wars 93

10.1 Responses to adversity 137

10.2 Posttraumatic growth pathways 144

12.1 Inputs in the formation of sustainable leadership 174

12.2 Sustainable leadership formation process 175

15.1 Biasing factors inuencing psychological and neuropsychological data 214

15.2 Biasing factors inuencing psychologists’ interpretations of data 215

18.1 Structural model of military turnover 257

20.1 Flow diagram of the systematic selection of studies 286

22.1 Proposed military model of alarm, resistance, and coping 344

22.2 Proposed conceptual model depicting moderated mediation of stress and

coping in military setting 345

24.1 Note: Clinical Health Psychology (CHP), Health Psychology (HP), Military

Psychology (MP), Evidence-Based Practices (EBP) 370

27.1 Age-Adjusted Suicide Rates among Females (per 100,000) by veteran Status 412

27.2 (a) Age-Specic Female veteran Suicide Rates (per 100,000). (b) Age-

Specic Female Non-veteran Suicide Rates (per 100,000) 412

30.1 A model relating traumatic exposure and post-traumatic stress disorder to

physical health outcomes 458

30.2 The relationship between mean levels of physical signs of depression and

level of military combat 461

LIST OF TABLES

14.1 Survey conducted at U.S. Army Recruiting and Retention School, Fort

Jackson, SC 2004 202

20.1 Study Characteristics 287

21.1 Burnout dimensions within the objective variables 324

21.2 Burnout dimensions for years of service 325

21.3 Burnout dimensions according to frequency of physical exercises 325

21.4 Burnout dimensions according to extra work hours 325

26.1 Studies examining whether military sexual trauma is associated with suicidal

ideation 391

26.2 Studies examining if military sexual trauma is associated with suicide attempt 397

26.3 Studies examining whether military sexual trauma is associated with suicide 400

26.4 Studies examining factors associated with suicidal ideation and suicide

attempts in military sexual trauma survivors 401

27.1 Overview of constructs relevant to each theory 415

30.1 Review articles published since 2007 summarizing ndings on post-traumatic

stress disorder as a predictor or risk factor for cardiovascular disease and other

physical health outcomes 453

30.2 Studies of post-traumatic stress disorder and conditions comorbid with

cardiovascular disease 453

xvii

EDITOR

Updesh Kumar, Ph.D., is Scientist ‘G’ and in the chair of the Head, Mental Health Division at

Defense Institute of Psychological Research (DIPR), R & D Organization (DRDO), Ministry

of Defense, Delhi. After obtaining his doctorate in the area of suicidal behaviour from Punjab

University, Chandigarh, India, he has more than 28 years of experience as a scientist in an R&D

organization. He specializes in the areas of military psychology, personality assessment, suicidal

behaviour, health psychology, and test development for the selection of ocers for the Indian

Armed Forces. Currently, he is also the project director of a mega project titled “Comprehensive

Soldier Fitness Program: Resilience Building” for the Indian Armed Forces. Dr. Kumar has been

involved in the selection of ocers and has been responsible for monitoring the selection system

of the Indian Armed Forces for the last 28 years. Dr. Kumar has edited 11 volumes which include

Suicidal Behaviour: Assessment of People-at-Risk (Sage, 2010), Countering Terrorism: Psychosocial

Strategies (Sage, 2012), Understanding Suicide Terrorism: Psychosocial Dynamics (Sage, 2014), Suicidal

Behaviour: Underlying Dynamics (Routledge, UK, 2015), Positive Psychology: Applications in Work,

Health and Well-Being (Pearson Education, 2015), The Wiley Handbook of Personality Assessment (John

Wiley & Sons, 2016), The Routledge International Handbook of Psychosocial Resilience (Routledge,

2016), Handbook of Suicidal Behavior (Springer Nature, 2017), and most recently Emotion, Well-

Being and Resilience: Theoretical Perspectives and Practical Applications (Apple Academic Press, in press).

The highlighted books with Sage Publications; Routledge, UK; John Wiley & Sons; Springer Nature; and

Apple Academic Press have been completed in collaboration with internationally acclaimed academicians/

researchers from India, the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, Singapore, Israel, France, Belarus,

Germany, Italy, Hungary, Hong Kong, Norway, Ireland, Ukraine, Netherlands, Canada South Africa

Croatia, Spain, and so on. He is also the past editor of the Journal of Indian Academy of Applied

Psychology (JIAAP). Dr. Kumar has also authored manuals on Suicide and Fratricide: Dynamics

and Management for defence personnel, Managing Emotions in Daily Life & at Work Place for the

general population, Overcoming Obsolescence & Becoming Creative in R&D Environment for R&D

organizations, and Self-Help Techniques in Military Settings. Besides completing many important

research projects for the Indian Armed Forces, he has authored more than 60 other academic

publications in the form of research papers, journal articles, and book chapters and represented

his institute at the national and international level. Dr. Kumar has been a psychological assessor

(psychologist) in various services selection boards for eight years for the selection of ocers in

the Indian Armed Forces. He is a certied psychologist by The British Psychological Society

Editor

xviii

with level “A” and “B” Certicates of Competence in Occupational Testing. He was conferred

with the DRDO’s Best Popular Science Communication Award–2009 by the Hon’ble Defense

Minister of India. He was also the recipient of the DRDO Technology Group Award in 2001

and 2009, Professor Manju Thakur Memorial Award 2009 and 2012 by the Indian Academy of

Applied Psychology (IAAP), and Professor N. N. Sen Best Paper Award for the year 2010 by the

Indian Association of Clinical Psychologists (IACP). He has been conferred with Laboratory

Scientist of the Year Award in 2012–2013 and the prestigious DRDO Scientist of the Year Award

in 2013 by the government of India.

xix

CONTRIBUTORS

Samridhi Ahuja is a RCI Certied Counsellor trained in child and adolescent guidance and

counselling from NIPCCD, New Delhi. She has pursued her Bachelors in psychology from Gargi

College and Masters in psychology from North Campus, University of Delhi. Having previously

practiced at NIPCCD, she is passionate about working with children with developmental

disorders and groups with special needs to improve their quality of life. Currently, she is pursuing

her Ph.D. in the area of clinical psychology. Her areas of interest also include Indian psychology,

developmental psychology, military psychology, and counselling. As a Senior Research Fellow

at the Defence Institute of Psychological Research, Defence R&D Organisation, Ministry of

Defence, she is associated with the major research project “Comprehensive Soldier Fitness

Program: Resilience Building” under the directorship of Dr. Updesh Kumar, Scientist ‘G’. Apart

from this, she has presented papers in various national and international conferences and has

original publications in peer-reviewed journals.

Archana, Ph.D., is Scientist ‘E’ at Defence Institute of Psychological Research (DIPR),

Ministry of Defence, India and is associated with R & D activities in the areas of organizational

behaviour, mental health and well-being of soldiers in the peace as well as eld locations. She has

to her credit number of papers in national journals of repute. She has authored two manuals on

‘stress management’ and ‘psychological well-being of soldiers at high altitude’. In addition, she

has made valuable contributions in organizing many workshops and seminars for the soldiers

in the area of military psychology. She has been the course coordinator in organizing training

programs for service ocers in the area of counselling. She has also been actively involved in

delivering lectures on stress management and other related areas in active eld environments.

Markus Auschek is a teaching psychologist at the Special Operations Training Center and has

experience as an operational psychologist in a mountain brigade, including multiple deployments

to Afghanistan and Mali. He is a trained sport psychologist.

Nazanin H. Bahraini is a Clinical Research Psychologist at the Rocky Mountain MIRECC

for Suicide Prevention and an Associate Professor in the Departments of Psychiatry and Physical

Medicine and Rehabilitation at the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus.

Contributors

Col. (Retd.) Paul T. Bartone, Ph.D., is a Visiting Senior Research Fellow at the Institute

for National Security Policy, National Defense University. A Fulbright Scholar, Bartone has

taught leadership and psychology at the Industrial College of the Armed Forces and at the U.S.

Military Academy, West Point, where he also served as Director of the Leader Development

Research Center. While on active duty, Bartone was the Senior Research Psychologist in

the U.S. Army and served as Research Psychology Consultant to the Surgeon General and

as Assistant Corps Chief for the Medical Allied Sciences. He is a former President of the

American Psychological Association’s Society for Military Psychology, a charter member of

the Association for Psychological Science, and a life member of the American Psychological

Association. He holds an M.A. and Ph.D. in psychology and human development from the

University of Chicago.

Col. (Dr.) Petrus C. Bester, D.Phil., joined the then-South African Defence Force in 1987.

He obtained a B. Mill. degree in 1991 and B. Mill. (Hons.) in industrial psychology in 1994 at

the Military Academy in Saldanha. In 1998, he completed his master’s degree in human resources

management at the Rand Afrikaans University (RAU) and registered with the Health Professions

Council as an industrial psychologist. He also completed the Doctoral Program Leadership in

Performance and Change at the University of Johannesburg at the end of January 2007. In 2008

he completed the South African National Defence Force’s Joint Senior Command and Sta

Program at the South African National War College. Subsequently, in 2017, he underwent and

completed the South African National Defence College’s Security and Defence Studies program

and postgraduate diploma in the management of security at the University of the Witwatersrand

as well. His research interests include leadership, integrity, performance enhancement, test

construction, and national security, and he is a Research Fellow at the Department of Industrial

Psychology (Mil), Military Science, at the University of Stellenbosch.

Bruce Bongar, Ph.D., ABPP, FAPM, C.Psychol., C.Sci., is the Calvin Distinguished Professor

of Psychology at Palo Alto University. Early in his career, Dr. Bongar developed strong interests

in identifying the risk factors associated with suicidal behaviour and clinical emergencies and

continues to be a prolic contributor to scholarly literature and research. He is a past president

of the Section on Clinical Emergencies and Crises of Division 12 of the American Psychological

Association. The American Association of Suicidology recognized Dr. Bongar for his work with

the early career achievement Edwin S. Shneidman Award for outstanding contributions to

research in suicidology and the Louis I. Dublin Award for signicant lifetime career contributions

to research in suicidology. In 2008, he was presented with the Florence Halpern award from the

Division of Clinical Psychology of the APA for his distinguished contributions to the profession

of clinical psychology. He also was awarded the Career Achievement Award from the Section on

Clinical Emergencies and Crises of the Division of Clinical Psychology of APA for his work on

suicide and life-threatening behaviours. In 2016, Professor Bongar’s research and scholarly work

on suicide was recognized by a lifetime achievement award in professional psychology by the

California Psychological Association.

Col. (Retd.) Stephen V. Bowles, Ph.D., ABPP, is currently serving as a Visiting Research Fellow

in the Institute for National Security Studies at the National Defense University in Washington, DC,

and as an Adjunct Faculty at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda,

Maryland. He is the President Elect for the Society for Military Psychology and the American

Psychology Association Council of Representatives for the District of Columbia Psychology. He

Contributors

xxi

served 27 years in the U.S. Army, is a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom, and is a graduate

and Fellow of The Eisenhower School at the National Defense University. He is a Distinguished

Practitioner and Fellow of the National Academy of Practice in Psychology, a Fellow in the American

Psychological Association (Div 19), and board certied in clinical health psychology.

Abigale Brady is a second-year student in the trauma track of the Ph.D. program after earning

her B.A. in psychology at Ashland University in Ohio. During her undergraduate career, she

served at a transitional living centre and as a research assistant at Ashland University. She is

interested in working with veterans and active duty military to treat combat-related PTSD

and treatment eects. Her research interests include studying military populations and the

development and treatment of phantom limb syndrome.

Diana P. Brostow, Ph.D., M.P.H., R.D.N., is a Research Nutritionist in the Rocky Mountain

MIRECC and on the faculty of the Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation at the

University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus.

Jacie Brown is a second-year student in the clinical psychology Ph.D. program at Palo Alto

University. Jacie is interested in pursuing the forensic area of emphasis with an interest in trauma.

She received her Bachelor’s of Arts in criminal justice and psychology from Ferris State University

and completed an undergraduate internship at Berghuis Psychological Services working with

adult outpatient sex oenders in a group setting. She also spent this time shadowing probation

and parole ocers. Her primary research interests include psychology of trauma within the

forensic and veteran populations, police training, and adaptive strategies for veterans after

returning home from combat.

Shane S. Bush, Ph.D.,ABPP,is director of Long Island Neuropsychology, PC, a neuropsychologist

with the VA New York Harbor Healthcare System, and an Adjunct Faculty member in the

Department of Psychology at the University of Alabama. He is board certied in clinical

neuropsychology, rehabilitation psychology, clinical psychology, and geropsychology. He has been

awarded Fellow status in the American Psychological Association (Divisions 12, 18, 20, 22, 40, and

42). He is a Past President and Fellow of the National Academy of Neuropsychology. He has also

held elected positions or served as a committee member for the American Academy of Clinical

Neuropsychology, American Board of Professional Psychology, American Board of Professional

Neuropsychology, American Board of Geropsychology, and multiple divisions of the American

Psychological Association. He has served as an editorial board member for multiple journals and

has presented on ethical and professional issues at national and international conferences. He

has more than 130 publications, including journal articles, book chapters, position papers for

professional organizations, and more than 20 books, some of which focus on psychological and

neuropsychological practice with military personnel and veterans. He is a veteran of both the

U.S. Marine Corps and Naval Reserve.

Filipa Castanheira, Ph.D., is Associate Professor at the Nova School of Business and Economics,

Universidade Nova de Lisboa in Lisbon (Portugal). She has a Ph.D. in social psychology and

teaches human resource management and organizational behaviour. She is member of the Nova

Leadership for Impact Knowledge Center and has participated in several research projects. Her

main research interests include stress and well-being at work, namely in a military context. She

has published in Military Psychology.

Contributors

xxii

Maria José Chambel, Ph.D., is Associate Professor at the Faculty of Psychology, University

of Lisbon in Lisbon (Portugal). She has a Ph.D. in social psychology and teaches in work and

organizational psychology. She is member of the CicPsi (Research Centre of Psychology Science

of University of Lisbon), where she coordinates the group Adaptation Process in Context of

applied psychology and has participated in several research projects. Her main research interests

include subjects such as stress and well-being at work, namely in a military context. She has

published in Military Psychology and Armed Forces & Society.

Reoot Cohen-Koren is currently Mental Health Ocer, Air Force, IDF Mental Health

Department, Medical Corps, Israel. She has an M.A. in clinical psychology from the Hebrew

University in Jerusalem. Her M.A. thesis work was on the correlation between gender, post-

traumatic growth, and ethnocentrism in adolescents that were exposed to terror. Her main

research interest lies in the area of mental health among soldiers and combat military soldiers.

Alanna Coady is an experienced researcher of psychology and religion. She obtained her

master’s degree at Harvard Divinity School and is currently a research assistant in Dr. Brett Litz’s

lab at the Massachusetts Veterans Epidemiological Research and Information Center at the VA

Boston Healthcare System. She is a project coordinator for an international mixed methods

measurement development project, the Moral Injury Outcomes Study Consortium, and oversees

numerous multisite randomized controlled trials of PTSD treatments for veterans and service

members. Ms. Coady brings to these projects her expertise in examining cultural and religious

factors in traumatic experiences, responses to trauma, and treatment approaches.

Hermes de Andrade Jr, Ph.D. Lieutenant Colonel of the Brazilian Army’s active reserve

has acted at all levels of leadership in several areas of the Ministry of Defense for 30 years. He

graduated in international relations (UNESA, Brazil) and military sciences (AMAN, Brazil),

with a master’s degree in Sociology (UFRRJ, Brazil) and doctorate in Public Health (ENSP/

FIOCRUZ, Brazil) with post-doctorate from Catholic University. He is senior researcher at

the CEFH/FFCS/Catholic University, Portugal. He is also involved with Doctoral Program in

Creativity, Social Innovation and Sustainability in University of Vigo, Spain. He has published

many articles in various journals and has been a collaborator of INOVLIDER (Portugal).

Marcos Aguiar de Souza is a Ph.D. in psychology and currently is Associate Professor at

the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. He is interested in techniques of data collection and

analysis, and construction and validation of measuring instruments in organizational psychology

and studies of psychology in public safety and in military contexts.

Yonel Ricardo de Souza, Colonel of the Artillery (Retired) of the Brazilian Army, is a graduate

of the Military Academy of Agulhas Negras (1990). He graduated in physical education from

the University of Caxias do Sul (2010) and has a Master’s degree in psychology from the Federal

University of Rondônia/UNIR (2015). He was Professor of Psychology at the Military Academy

of Agulhas Negras (2015). He is currently a student of the medicine course at the Federal

University of Paraíba.

Stephanie Ellickson-Larew is a postdoctoral clinical research fellow working with Professor

Brett T. Litz in the Massachusetts Veterans Epidemiological Research and Information Center

division at the VA Boston Healthcare System. She is also currently a Ph.D. candidate working

Contributors

xxiii

with David Watson, Ph.D., at the University of Notre Dame. Her research background is in

psychometric and structural analyses of psychopathology broadly and of dissociation specically,

as well as their intersection with normal-range and pathological personality traits. She is currently

interested in focusing on the impact of trauma, stress, and moral injury on developing and

maintaining psychopathology and maladaptive personality traits, especially in the manifestations

of dissociation, externalizing symptomatology, and suicidality.

Gordana Nedic Erjavec, Ph.D., is a research associate at Ruđer Boskovic Institute (RBI)

Zagreb, Croatia. She works in the Laboratory for Molecular Neuropsychiatry at the Department

of Molecular Medicine at RBI. She is a molecular biologist with a particular interest in biological

psychiatry. As a collaborator on the oset project funded by Patria, she did her postdoctoral

training on metabolomics of PTSD. Besides this project, Dr. Nedic Erjavec is a collaborator on a

research project funded by Croatian Science Foundation, dealing with the role of specic genetic

polymorphisms and glycome in the development of PTSD and its symptoms and comorbidities.

She has coauthored 43 articles in journals and 15 chapters in scientic books and has been cited

832 times, with H-index = 14. In 2013 she was awarded the National Science Award of the

Republic of Croatia – Annual Award for Junior Researchers for 2012 in the eld of biomedicine.

Marissa N. Eusebio is a third-year student at Palo Alto University in the clinical psychology

Ph.D. program. Prior to attending Palo Alto University, Marissa received a B.S. in psychology with

an emphasis in neuroscience and behaviour from the University of California, San Diego.She

is currently specializing in adult and child trauma, particularly focusing on military and military

families. Marissa is currently a practicum student at the Martinez VA Health Care System where

she works in the Neurocognitive Rehabilitation Clinic. She also works at the San Francisco

VA Health Care System for the Stress and Health Research Program. Marissa has taken on a

leadership role and has been involved in various research projects with the Clinical Crises and

Emergencies Research Lab at Palo Alto University, predominantly focusing on suicide prevention

strategies among marginalized populations.

Anna Feinman is a second-year student in the clinical psychology Ph.D. program at PAU,

where she is looking forward to completing the forensic area of emphasis. She received her

Bachelor of Arts in psychology and political science from University of California, Santa Barbara,

and her masters in marriage and family therapy from University of Southern California. Anna

completed her MFT Internship at Ventura County Behavioral Health working with SMI

adolescents and their families. Anna is currently a member of Dr. Bongar’s Clinical Crises and

Emergencies Lab at PAU and is a student therapist at the Gronowski Clinic. She is also a research

assistant at the UCSF Stress and Resilience Lab at the San Francisco VA. Her primary research

interests include the psychology of terrorism and murder-suicide, rearm access and mental

health, and police training.

Fabio Biasotto Feitosa, psychologist, graduated from Universidade Estadual Paulista/UNESP

(2000) and is a Ph.D. in interpersonal relations at Federal University of São Carlos/UFSCar

(2007). He has complementary training for the treatment of depression by the interpersonal

approach in Leicestershire/NHS Trust, England. His postdoctoral degree is in treatment and

psychological prevention at University College London/UCL (2015). He is Professor of the

Department of Psychology/DEPSI of the Federal University of Rondônia/UNIR. He has been

a member of the European Health Psychology Society/EHPS since 2009.

Contributors

xxiv

Amber M. Fox graduated from the University of Maryland in 2016 with a B.S. in psychology.

During her time as an undergraduate, Amber Fox volunteered as a Research Assistant at the

Culture Lab, directed by Dr. Michele Gelfand, as well as the Comprehensive Assessment and

Intervention Program (CAIP) Lab, directed by Dr. Andres De Los Reyes. Currently, Amber Fox

is working as a Research Assistant and Project Coordinator for the Suicide Care, Prevention,

and Research (CPR) Initiative, directed by Dr. Marjan G. Holloway, at the Uniformed Services

University of the Health Sciences. In this capacity, she engages in research on military suicide

prevention, as well as curriculum development for a military program to enhance cognitive agility.

Sheila Frankfurt, Ph.D., is a counselling psychologist in the Department of Veterans Aairs,

Veterans Integrated Service Network 17 Center of Excellence for Research on Returning

War Veterans, in Waco, Texas. Dr. Frankfurt conducts research on trauma, post-traumatic stress

disorder, and moral injury. She is currently working to develop high-quality assessments of

moral injury events and outcomes. She is supported by a Career Development Award – 1

from the Department of Veterans Aairs Rehabilitation Research and Development Oce

(5IK1RX002427-02). Other current projects include a qualitative examination of veterans’,

service members’, and care providers’ needs and desires for moral injury treatments and an

exploration of clinicians’ decision-making processes in the treatment of PTSD. Dr. Frankfurt

serves as Deputy Director of the Clinical Investigation Research Oce at Carl R. Darnall Army

Medical Center, Fort Hood, Texas. Dr. Frankfurt is currently on the editorial board of The

Counseling Psychologist.

Dror Garbi is currently the Head of the Aeromedical Psychology Section, Air Force, IDF

Mental Health Department, Israeli Medical Corps. Dror Garbi is an intern in clinical psychology;

his main research interest is enhancement of cognitive performance using visual and cognitive

training for aviators and developing sensitive monitoring tools for cognitive deterioration using

the platform of ight simulators. Major Garbi also investigates individual dierences in executive

functions as part of his Ph.D. research at Ben-Gurion University.

Shobit Garg received his D.P.M. and M.D. from Central Institute of Psychiatry (CIP), Ranchi.

He has served as an Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychiatry, Shri Guru Ram Rai

Institute of Medical and Health Sciences (SGRRIM), since 2013. He was also a senior resident

in CIP, Ranchi. He has various national and international publications and chapters to his name

and has presented papers at national conferences.

Shirley Gordon, Ph.D., is currently the Head of the Psychology Branch in the Israeli Air Force,

Mental Health Department, Israeli Medical Corps. Dr. Gordon is a clinical neuropsychologist

(Ph.D.). Her main research interest is enhancement of cognitive performance using dierent

training tools. Dr. Gordon has published several papers in journals of repute.

Jacques J. Gouws, MMM, C.Psych., Ph.D., is a former South African Air Force Ocer

and retired military psychologist. Dr. Gouws both researched and gained extensive rst

hand experience of the resourcefulness required from soldiers and their commanders when

faced by the insurmountable obstacles posed by the stress of being deployed in conventional

and non-conventional combat zones (complicated by the pressures from the international

political arena, the reactions of the civilian population to the casualties of battle, and the

strain placed on society in general) during long-term sustained military operations. As

Chair of the Department of Industrial/Organizational Psychology, he established the rst

Contributors

xxv

academic under- and postgraduate courses in military psychology at the Faculty of Military

Science, University of Stellenbosch, South Africa, in 1990. He consults and lectures on the

psychological eects and impact of war. He also provides psychological treatment to military,

veterans, and rst-line emergency responders, such as police and reghters. He is a frequent

speaker at international and local conventions and workshops. He is quoted in the media

in particular on PTSD and how it manifests in soldiers. He is the author of several book

chapters on these topics.

Breanna Grunthal, B.A., is a research technician for Dr. Brett Litz in the Massachusetts Veterans

Epidemiological Research and Information Center division at the VA Boston Healthcare System.

She obtained her Bachelor of Arts degree in psychology and health and wellness studies from

State University of New York (SUNY), Binghamton University, in 2018 and plans to pursue a

Ph.D. in clinical psychology. Although a new professional in the eld, Breanna has already delved

into multiple research projects and has embraced opportunities to work on her own independent

projects. Her research interests include the impact of stressful life events and social pressure on

internalizing symptoms and psychological resiliency.

Catherine Hausman, M.S., is a fth-year student in the Trauma Emphasis of the clinical

psychology Ph.D. program at Palo Alto University (PAU). She is currently on internship at the

New Mexico VA where her primary rotations are in the Military Trauma Treatment Program

and the Indian Health Service. She has completed prior clinical training with the Palo Alto VA

and San Mateo County Behavioral Health and Recovery Services. For the Clinical Crises and

Emergencies Research Group at PAU, advised by Bruce Bongar, Ph.D., Catherine works with

Stanford School of Medicine developing a culturally based suicide screening protocol for primary

care, with the army studying physical bravery in military service members and veterans, and

studies training standards in behavioural emergencies for psychologists. Catherine’s dissertation

is examining physical bravery through original data collected from U.S. Army reservists. Also,

Catherine has been involved in research on a clinical trial for veterans with PTSD and substance

use as part of the National Center for PTSD’s Substance and Anxiety Intervention Laboratory.

Catherine is also involved with the Trauma Student Group and Student Veterans Organization

at PAU. Her pre-graduate school research experience involved studying suicide prevention in

veterans with PTSD with Dr. Herbert Hendin in NYC.

Annett Heidler is an operational psychologist in an armoured infantry brigade and has worked

with Customs and Border Control.

Claire A. Homire is an Epidemiologist in the Rocky Mountain MIRECC and Assistant

Professor in the Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation at the University of

Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus.

Ryan Holliday, Ph.D., is an Advanced Psychology Postdoctoral Fellow in the Rocky Mountain

MIRECC and Instructor in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Colorado

Anschutz Medical Campus.

Marjan Ghahramanlou Holloway, Ph.D., is an adjunct faculty member of the Beck Institute

for Cognitive Behavior Therapy and an Associate Professor of Medical and Clinical Psychology

and Psychiatry at Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences. Dr. Holloway completed

her postdoctoral training in 2005 at the University of Pennsylvania under the mentorship of Dr.

Contributors

xxvi

Aaron T. Beck. Dr. Holloway currently serves as the Director for the Suicide Care, Prevention,

and Research Initiative. In this capacity, she conducts programmatic research on military suicide

prevention, with primary emphasis on the application of cognitive behavioural principles to

dierent settings and vulnerable patient populations.

Tim Hoyt, Ph.D., is Chief of the Connected Health Branch in the Defense Health Agency,

Virginia. His primary expertise is in combat-related post-traumatic stress disorder, the integration

of technology into health care, and treatment approaches for military sexual trauma.

Faizan Imtiaz, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor of Organizational Psychology at Towson University.

His research interests include resilience, organizational performance, and decision-making across

the adult lifespan. Dr. Imtiaz has taught a wide range of courses in psychology, kinesiology, and

business at Towson University, Queen’s University, and the Royal Military College of Canada.

His applied experience includes work as a performance consultant at the Queen’s Smith School

of Business and in the private sector.

Col. (Retd.) Larry C. James, Ph.D., ABPP, is a nationally recognized expert in national security,

defence issues, clinical psychopharmacology, and clinical health psychology. He is currently the

President and CEO of the Wright Behavioral Health Group, LLC, and a Professor at Wright

State University. Previously he served as the Associate Vice President for Military Aairs at Wright

State University in Dayton, Ohio. Prior to that assignment, he served as the Dean, School of

Professional Psychology, Wright State University, from 2008 to 2013. He received his Ph.D. in

counselling psychology at the University of Iowa and a Post-Doctoral Fellowship in behavioural

medicine at Tripler Army Medical Center. He was the Chair, Department of Psychology, at Walter

Reed Army Medical Center and the Chair, Department of Psychology, at Tripler Army Medical

Center. He was awarded a Bronze Star and the Defense Superior Service Medal. In his nearly

three-decade military career, Colonel James had many deployments. Most notably, he deployed

to Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Colonel James distinguished himself during these

deployments and is one of the nation’s military ocers who were credited with putting policies

and procedures in place to prevent abuse. He has lectured internationally and has published eight

books, with several others in press, and over 100 professional papers and conference presentations.

E. Ann Jeschke, Ph.D., is a bioethicist specializing in military medicine. Dr. Jeschke defended

her dissertation on post-deployment reintegration in 2015 at St. Louis University’s Center for

Health Care Ethics. She is currently engaged in postdoctoral training under the mentorship

of Dr. Marjan G. Holloway, Ph.D., in the Suicide Care, Prevention and Research Initiative.

In this capacity, Dr. Jeschke is interested in exploring programmatic research that evaluates

the eectiveness of behavioural health interventions that seek to increase cognitive agility

and decrease stress related to major and minor role transition across the military life-cycle. Dr.

Jeschke’s current research portfolio also includes an ethical inquiry into the training needs of

combat medics when attending death in combat casualty care.

Li-Jun Ji, Ph.D., is a Professor of psychology at Queen’s University, Canada. Her research

examines how culture shapes the way people think, reason, and make decisions, and the

implications for behaviour, emotion, and motivation. Dr. Ji has published many articles in top

psychology journals and books and has consulted for government institutions and businesses on

issues related to culture, prediction, and decision-making.

Contributors

xxvii

Ryaja Johnson, M.B.A., Psy.M., is a doctoral student in clinical psychology at Wright State

University’s School of Professional Psychology in Dayton, Ohio. She is interested in Health

Psychology and Rehabilitation Psychology. Ryaja’s research and clinical training are currently in

the areas of post-traumatic stress disorder and trauma-focused, evidence-based interventions. Her

dissertation study is investigating the relationship between spirituality and cognitive processing

therapy treatment outcomes to determine if spirituality is a non-targeted change mechanism.

A former Captain in the United States Air Force, Ryaja served seven years on active duty as a

Contracting Ocer. She has negotiated and managed multimillion-dollar contracts stateside and

while deployed. Ryaja continues to stay actively connected to veteran and military initiatives

in her community. Her leadership and community engagement have been recognized and

honoured at both national and local levels.

K. C. Kalmbach, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor of psychology and licensed clinical

psychologist. Over the past two decades, she has held positions as a researcher, administrator,

clinician, consultant, and educator. Her clinical work has revolved around high-risk/high-

trauma populations. Before joining the faculty at Texas A&M University–San Antonio, she

helped build the rst juvenile oender mental health court in Houston, Texas. Prior to this, as

faculty at California State University–Los Angeles, she conducted community needs assessments

in high-risk neighbourhoods for the Los Angeles Mayor’s Oce. Before entering academia,

Dr. Kalmbach served as a director of the Texas Regional Center for Policing Innovation, a

federally funded training institute tasked with providing progressive training for community

stakeholders and justice system personnel throughout the State ofTexas. Currently, in addition

to teaching, she has worked with hundreds of returning combat-deployed military members

and families.

Kalman J. Kaplan, Ph.D., is Professor of psychiatry/Director of the Program for Religion,

Spirituality and Mental Health at the University of Illinois at Chicago College of Medicine

and Adjunct Professor at Spertus Institute of Jewish Studies. He has been Editor of the Journal

of Psychology and Judaism and on the editorial board of Omega. Dr. Kaplan has published

widely in the areas of interpersonal and international relations, the emerging eld of biblical

psychology, schizophrenia, and suicide/suicide prevention. Dr. Kaplan is a Fellow in the

American Psychological Association, was co-recipient of the 1998 Alexander Gralnick Award

for outstanding original research in suicide and schizophrenia, and was a 2006–2007 and 2011–

2012 Fulbright Fellow at Tel Aviv University. Dr. Kaplan has published 15 books, many book

chapters, and close to 100 published articles and has given over 150 presentations, both nationally

and internationally. During 2007–2010, Dr. Kaplan was awarded a start-up grant from The

John Templeton Foundation to develop an online program in religion, spirituality, and mental

health at the University of Illinois College of Medicine. He is a member of the ongoing Faith

Communities Task Force of the National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention.

Alexander G. Karayani, Ph.D., is a principal researcher of the National Research Institute of

the Ministry of Interior of the Russian Federation, Moscow. His research investigates how the

perspective directions of development of military psychology depend on an image of future

war. Dr. Karayani has published a set of scientic articles in the leading Russian magazines,

monographs, and textbooks. He provides consultation to military management concerning

psychological training of the military personnel, psychological support, and rehabilitation of

combatants.

Contributors

xxviii

Noah K. Kaufman, Ph.D., ABN, ABPdN, earned a B.A. from the University of New Mexico

and an M.S. and Ph.D. from the University of Oregon. He is board certied by both the

American Board of Professional Neuropsychology and the American Board of Pediatric

Neuropsychology. Dr. Kaufman is a Clinical Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychiatry

at Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center in El Paso, Texas. He is the co-author of

multiple peer-reviewed publications, has served as an invited reviewer for multiple journals,

and was the recipient of the 2018 Distinguished Service Award from the American Board of

Professional Neuropsychology. Dr. Kaufman currently focuses the majority of his time on

running a clinical and forensic neuropsychology practice at The Center for Neuropsychological

Studies in Las Cruces, New Mexico. Before pursuing his studies, Dr. Kaufman was a national

champion bicycle racer in 1987 and became interested in psychology after being exposed to

sport psychology while attending training camps at the Olympic Training Center in Colorado

Springs, Colorado.

Harprit Kaur, Ph.D., is Associate Professor and Head of the Department at Punjabi University

Patiala. She has her M.Phil. in clinical psychology from NIMHANS, Bangalore, and Ph.D.

from Punjab University Chandigarh. She has worked in Government Medical College and

Hospital (GMCH) and Post Graduate Institute of Medical Research (PGI) Chandigarh as

clinical psychologist. For the past 15 years, she has worked as teaching faculty in the psychology

department of Punjabi University, Patiala. She has published many research articles in national and

international journals of repute. She has also conducted many workshops on stress management

in various Army units, including Pathankot and Udampur in India.

Mark Khei is a Ph.D. candidate in social and cultural psychology at Queen’s University, Canada.

His research is devoted to better understanding the inuence of culture and social environments

in people’s decision-making, as well as how suering contributes towards meaning-making and

resilience. Mark holds M.Sc. in cultural and social psychology from Queen’s University and a

Bachelor of Arts in social psychology from the Nanyang Technological University in Singapore.

Marcela Konjevod, M.Sc., is a molecular biologist and Ph.D. student in the Laboratory for

Molecular Neuropsychiatry, Division of Molecular Medicine, at Ruđer Boskovic Institute. She

is currently employed on the project funded by Croatian Science Foundation: “Genomic and

Glycomic Biomarkers for PTSD,” led by Nela Pivac. She started her education in the Department

of Biology at Josip Juraj Strossmayer University in Osijek, and later at the Faculty of Science at the

University in Zagreb, where she graduated and was promoted to M.Sc. of molecular biology in

2016. She is currently enrolled in Ph.D. studies (medicinal chemistry) at the University of Rijeka.

Since April 2018, she has been in the pre-doctoral specialization at Centro de Metabolomica

Bioanalisis, Universidad CEU–San Pablo, Madrid. She is conducting research on PTSD samples

in order to nd potential metabolomic biomarkers. She has published eight journal articles

(IF = 3.45). She is a recipient of three Dean’s awards, one Rector’s award and two grants for

FENS – Regional Meeting in Pécs, Hungary (2017) and for XVIII Scientic Meeting of the

Spanish Society of Chromatography and Related Techniques (SECyTA), Granada, Spain (2018).

Oliver Kozumplik, M.D., Ph.D., Assistant Professor, is a psychiatrist working at the University

Psychiatric Hospital Vrapče, Zagreb, and subspecialist in biological psychiatry. He organizes a

postgraduate course with Suzana Uzun on “Side Eects of Psychopharmaceutic Drugs,” School

of Medicine, Zagreb University. He is a lecturer at the School of Medicine, University of Zagreb,

Contributors

xxix

and he participated (as a co-investigator) in 10 multicentric clinical psychopharmacological trials.

He was a collaborator on the scientic project “Side Eects of Antipsychotics,” led by Suzana

Uzun, founded by the Ministry of Sciences, Education and Sports of the Republic of Croatia, and

on the bilateral project with Slovenia, “The Role of 5-HT6 Receptors in Alzheimer’s Disease,”

led by Suzana Uzun, and is collaborator on the project led by Nela Pivac, funded by Croatian

Science Foundation: “Genomic and Glycomic Biomarkers for PTSD.”

Oliver Krueckel is head of psychology in the German Army Training command and has 10

years of experience as an operational psychologist in the eld, working in an armoured brigade,

with the Special Forces, with the U.S. Defense Center of Excellence for Psychological Health

and TBI, and in Training and Doctrine. He served as a reserve ocer in an airborne brigade and

has been deployed as a psychologist to Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Mali.

Jessica M. LaCroix, Ph.D., is a Social Psychologist and a Research Assistant Professor in the

Department of Medical and Clinical Psychology at the Uniformed Services University of the

Health Sciences in Bethesda, Maryland. She serves as Co-Principal Investigator at the Suicide Care,

Prevention, and Research Initiative (Suicide CPR), where she works to design and implement a

number of programmatic studies to advance the science and clinical practice of suicide prevention,

intervention, and postvention for military populations. Her primary research interests include stigma,

gender, attitudes toward suicide and mental health treatment, and the design, implementation, and

evaluation of suicide prevention interventions for military personnel and their families.

Brett T. Litz. Ph.D., is a clinical psychologist and Professor in the Departments of Psychiatry

and Psychology at Boston University. He is currently the Director of the Mental Health Core of

the Massachusetts Veterans Epidemiological Research and Information Center at the VA Boston

Healthcare System. Dr. Litz has been conducting clinical research on PTSD among war veterans

at the Boston VA since 1987 and is internationally recognized as an expert on the assessment and

treatment of war-related PTSD and moral injury. He is a principal investigator on numerous

research projects funded by the Departments of Defense and Veterans Aairs. His recent work

entails evaluating the social, psychological, and spiritual impact of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars

among active-duty military personnel and veterans and conducting clinical trials of a psychotherapy

called Adaptive Disclosure, which individualizes PTSD treatment by treating danger, loss, and

moral injury traumas dierently. Dr. Litz is a fellow of the Association of Behavioral and Cognitive

Therapies, the American Psychopathological Association, and the Association for Psychological

Science. He has over 300 publications and has authored three books.

Sílvia Lopes, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor at the European University, Lisbon (Portugal), and

is a member of the CicPsi (Research Centre of Psychology Science of University of Lisbon),

where she has participated in several research projects. She has a Ph.D. in human resources, work,

and organizational psychology and teaches human resource management and data analysis. Her

main research interests include stress and well-being at work, namely in military context. She

has published in Military Psychology.

Col. Vasile Marineanu is the Head of the Romanian National Military Center for Psychology

and Behavioral Health, the President of Romanian Society for Military Psychology, member in

the Board of the Romanian College of Psychologists, and Adjunct Professor at the University

of Bucharest. He is a graduate of the Romanian Air Force Academy (1989), the University of

Contributors

xxx

Bucharest (1996), and the European Centre for Strategic Security Studies “George C. Marshall,”

Germany (2001). Since 2014, he has been the national representative for mental health to

NATO Center of Excellence for Military Medicine, and since 2015 a member of the Research

Task Group on Sexual Violence within the Human Factors and Medicine Panel of NATO

Science and Technology Agency. Dr. Marineanu is a licensed practitioner with over 20 years of

experience in clinical and operational psychology, acquired during the operations in Bosnia-

Herzegovina (1997), Kosovo (2000, 2002, 2004), and Afghanistan (2010). His scientic research

includes publications and projects such as The Psychology of Suicide Martyrdom in Afghanistan and

Its Implications for Psychological Operations (2017), Supervised Practice in Evidence-Based Clinical

Psychology (2017), Crises Intervention and Psychological First Aid (2016), and Psychological

Screening for Mental Health in Romanian Military (2015).

Ipek Mete is currently a doctoral candidate in the eld of work and organizational psychology

at the Department of Psychology in Middle East Technical University (METU). She also holds

a Research Assistant position at the Department of Management in Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt

University. She received her MBA degree from METU in 2013, with a thesis concentrating on

team composition and conict. She spent a year of her doctoral studies as a visiting student at

the Department of Psychology in University of South Florida, where she conducted research

in team performance assessment. Her research interests include training and development in

teams, team dynamics, team performance assessment, and selection and assessment in work

and educational settings. Ipek Mete has presented her research on the topics of teams and

educational assessment in international conferences. She has publications in national and

international journals.

Peter Mikoski, B.A., is a graduate-level research intern at National Defence University under

the supervision of Dr. Stephen Bowles. He is currently pursuing a M.P.S. degree in clinical

psychological science at the University of Maryland. Peter is a member of both Psi Chi and Phi

Beta Kappa. His research interests include anxiety disorders, aective disorders, well-being, and

pseudoscience.

Jyoti Mishra, Ph.D., is working as a clinical psychologist at Government Medical College and

Hospital (GMCH), Department of Psychiatry, Chandigarh. She received her M.Phil. in medical

and social psychology (M.M&SP) from Central Institute of Psychiatry (CIP), Ranchi. She has

also worked as an Assistant Professor in the Department of Clinical Psychology at Central

Institute of Psychiatry (CIP). She has to her credit various publications and has presented papers

at national conferences. She has two chapters in an international index book.

Lindsey L. Monteith, Ph.D., is a Clinical Research Psychologist in the Rocky Mountain

Mental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Center (MIRECC) for Suicide Prevention

and Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Colorado Anschutz

Medical Campus.

Bret A. Moore, Ph.D., is a prescribing psychologist and board-certied clinical psychologist in

San Antonio, Texas, and Vice Chair of Boulder Crest Institute. He is a former active duty Army

psychologist and two-tour veteran of Iraq. He is the author and editor of 16 books, including

the Posttrauamtic Growth Workbook, Treating PTSD in Military Personnel: A Clinical Handbook, Wheels

Down: Adjusting to Life after Deployment, and Taking Control of Anxiety: Small Steps for Overcoming

Worry, Stress, and Fear. Dr. Moore is a Fellow of the American Psychological Association and

Contributors

xxxi

recipient of the Arthur W. Melton Award for Early Career Achievement in Military Psychology

from Division 19 and the Early Career Achievement Award in Public Service Psychology from

Division 18 of APA. His views on clinical and military psychology have been quoted in USA

Today, The New York Times, and The Boston Globe, and on CNN and Fox News. He has appeared

on NPR, the BBC, and CBC.

Swati Mukherjee, Ph.D., is Scientist ‘E’ at Defence Institute of Psychological Research (DIPR),

Delhi. She is involved in many major research projects of the Institute, including research on

suicide in the Armed Forces. She has to her credit a few publications in the form of journal

articles and book chapters in books published by reputed publishers, including Taylor & Francis

and Sage Publications. She has been the associate editor of a volume on “Recent Developments

in Psychology” and has co-authored a manual on Suicide and Fratricide: Dynamics and Management

for Armed Forces personnel and a manual on Overcoming Obsolescence & Becoming Creative in

R&D Environment for R&D organizations. Her areas of interest are social psychology, positive

mental health practices, and suicidal behaviour. She was a recipient of the Defence Research &

Development Organization (DRDO) Best Performance Award in the year 2008.

Thomas E. Myers, Ph.D., ABPP-CN, is a board-certied clinical neuropsychologist who

completed his Ph.D. at The Graduate Center/Queens College, City University of New York

(CUNY) and an internship in rehabilitation neuropsychology at New York University’s

Rusk Institute for Rehabilitation. Dr. Myers completed a postdoctoral fellowship in clinical

neuropsychology at Stony Brook University Hospital where he evaluated children and adults

across the lifespan. Dr. Myers is an adjunct assistant professor at Queens College and Queens

borough Community College, CUNY, where he has taught a variety of undergraduate psychology

courses for over 12 years. He is an adjunct faculty member at Farmingdale State College and the

State University of New York at Old Westbury. Currently, Dr. Myers has a part-time position as

a paediatric neuropsychologist at St. Charles Hospital and has an independent practice consisting

of clinical and forensic neuropsychological evaluations. Dr. Myers has conducted research in

the areas of emotion processing and neuropsychological correlates of self-awareness and has

published several peer-reviewed articles and book chapters. He is an ad hoc reviewer for the

journals Professional Psychology: Research and Practice and Translational Issues in Psychological Science.

Laura A. Novak M.P.S. earned a Bachelor of Science in psychology from Towson University in

2010, and a Master’s of Professional Studies in clinical psychological science from the University

of Maryland, College Park, in 2016. Ms. Novak has over 7.5 years of experience working in

psychological health research within the military health system. She previously worked as a

contractor supporting the Defense Centers of Excellence for Psychological Health and Traumatic

Brain Injury (DCoE) Deployment Health Clinical Center (DHCC). Ms. Novak currently works

as a Scientic Program Coordinator for the Suicide Care, Prevention, and Research (CPR)

Initiative, directed by Dr. Marjan G. Holloway, at the Uniformed Services University of the

Health Sciences (USUHS). In this capacity, she engages in and supports programmatic research

on military suicide prevention and intervention. Her research experience includes grant and

portfolio management, clinical trial coordination, manuscript/presentation development, study

recruitment, and data collection.

Dan Nyaronga, Ph.D., currently works at the State University of New York (SUNY)-Empire

State College where he serves as an Associate Professor of Psychology. He is also a visiting faculty

member at SUNY University at Bualo, where he teaches Summer Study Abroad Program to

Contributors

xxxii

Africa “Community Development in Context: Mara Region, Tanzania,” an interdisciplinary

program with a focus on community development that oers innovative experiential learning

for undergraduate and graduate students from SUNY Institutions in New York. His research

focuses on students’ experiential learning, risk and resilient factors, minority groups (e.g., military

families, refugees, and immigrants), gender violence, and physical and mental health outcomes. Dr.

Nyaronga completed both his doctorate and Masters of Science degree in human development

and family studies (HDFS) from Iowa State University. His Bachelor’s degree in community

development is from Daystar University, Nairobi. Dr. Nyaronga previously taught at Des Moines

Area Community College (DMACC) in Iowa. He also worked in California as a postdoctoral

research fellow at UC Berkeley School of Public Health, focusing on the epidemiology of

alcohol use and alcohol disparities. In addition, he worked as a research associate for the Military

Family Research Institute (MFRI) at Purdue University (Indiana). His community aliations

include Flower Garden Childcare International (past president), HEAL International (past board

Member), Bualo Tanzania Education Project (Member), and Girls Education Collaborative

(past board member). Dr. Nyaronga has authorship in a number of peer-reviewed journals and

other publications.

Vijay Parkash, Ph.D., is Scientist ‘D’ at Defence Institute of Psychological Research, Defence

R&D Organization, Delhi. His area of specialization includes health psychology, personality, and

psychometrics, and he has 10 years of research experience. He has also served as a Psychologist at

Air Force Selection Board, Dehradun, for around two years. He has been involved in many major

research projects related to suicidal behaviour and test constructions for Personnel Selection in

Indian Armed Forces and Paramilitary Forces. He has a co-editor of two edited volumes, Recent

Developments in Psychology and Counseling: A Practical Approach, and has to his credit more than 20

other academic publications in the form of journal articles and book chapters. Defence Institute

of Psychological Research conferred upon him the Scientist of the Year Award – 2011 and 2015

for his outstanding contributions.

Matea Nikolac Perkovic, Ph.D., is currently working as a research associate in the Laboratory

for Molecular Neuropsychiatry at the Division of Molecular Medicine, Ruđer Bošković Institute,

Zagreb (Croatia), where she is included in various national and international research projects.

Most of her scientic work so far has been devoted to the study of molecular basis of various

neurodegenerative, neuropsychiatric, and neurodevelopmental disorders. In 2013 she was awarded

the most important Croatian national award in the eld of science, the National Science Award of

the Republic of Croatia–Annual Award for Junior Researchers in the eld of Biomedicine. She

was also acknowledged for her scientic achievements with the Annual Award of the Society of

University Teachers, Scholars and Other Scientists – Zagreb for Young Scientists and Artists for

2013, and a few other national awards. She has published 45 papers in reputable journals and has

co-authored 15 chapters in scientic books. Currently, she is at a postdoc training in Madrid,

at The Centre of Metabolomics and Bioanalysis (CEMBIO) (the Pharmacy Faculty, San Pablo

CEU), where she is expending her interests by obtaining up-to-date experience in a relatively

new and very interesting eld—metabolomics.

Nela Pivac, Ph.D., is a re-elected senior scientist and full professor at Ruđer Bošković Institute

(RBI), Zagreb, Croatia. She is a head of the Laboratory for Molecular Neuropsychiatry at the

Department of Molecular Medicine at RBI. Among other research topics in biological psychiatry,

Dr. Pivac evaluates the neurobiological underpinning of PTSD, treatment response, and dierent

biological/genetic markers in PTSD. She participated in pioneering studies showing that atypical

Contributors

xxxiii

antipsychotics are a good adjuvant therapy for treatment-resistant veterans with PTSD. She is a PI

on research projects funded by the Croatian Ministry of Sciences, Education and Sport, Croatian

Science Foundation, and a collaborator on the oset project funded by Patria regarding PTSD,

and a PI of Croatian-USA or Croatian-Slovenian collaborative projects, evaluating biomarkers of

schizophrenia and Alzheimer’s disease. Her recent projects have evaluated the association between

genetic variants and PTSD development, symptoms and comorbidities in PTSD, and the role of

glycans, regulated by specic genes, or metabolomes, in combat-related PTSD. She has published

159 articles in journals and has authored/coauthored 43 chapters in scientic books and been

cited 3,372 times, with H-index = 34, and was awarded the most prestigious Croatian National

awards and MTA Distinguished Guest Scientists Fellowship Programme in Hungary.

Laurel K. Cofell Rashti, Ph.D., currently serves as the consulting psychologist for the U.S.

Army Drill Sergeant Academy and Leader Training Brigade. In this capacity, she serves as the

primary subject matter expert for Drill Sergeant Assessment and selection. She attained her

doctorate in psychology from the Uniformed Services University and since that time has also

served in clinical leadership positions. She is a member of Division 19, Society for Military

Psychology, and Division 13, Society of Consulting Psychology.

Carolina Rodrigues-Silveira is a Captain in the Brazilian Army and a military psychologist.

She holds a Bachelor’s in psychology and a Latu Sensu Postgraduate Degree in military

sciences. She was the Chief Organizational Psychologist in the 20th Contingent of the United

Nations Peacekeeping Force in Haiti – MINUSTAH (2014) and carried out the psychological

accompaniment of the 2nd National Force of the Portuguese Republic (Commands Battalion)

during peacekeeping operations at Central African Republican – MINUSCA (2018). Presently,

she is a Ph.D. student at the University of Lisbon and member of the CicPsi (Research Centre

of Psychology Science of University of Lisbon).

António Palma Rosinha, Ph.D., is a Lieutenant-Colonel of the Portuguese Army and a

military psychologist. He graduated in Military Sciences from Military Academy, with a Bachelor

in psychology and a Ph.D. in human resources management and organizational psychology

from Lisbon University. He is a Professor of Human Resources Management, Organizational

Psychology and Team Leadership in Military Academy (AM) and also professor of Command

and Leadership the Joint Sta Course at the Portuguese Military University Institute (IUM)

and Deputy Director of the Higher Institute of Business Communication (ISCEM). Rosinha is

a Researcher at the Research and Development Centre of the Military University Institute and

at the Military Academy Research Center (CINAMIL). He integrates the Research Group of

ANPEPP – Brazilian, Working Group Culture and Health in Organizations. He is also a founder

of the Leadership Innovation Center (INOVLIDER). He has several research articles and is

author of the book Leadership Study Cases in Military Context: Practice Facing Theory and co-author

of the book Performance Assessment.

Michael G. Rumsey, Ph.D., worked at the U.S. Army Research Institute (ARI) for the

Behavioral and Social Sciences from 1975, the year he received his doctorate in social psychology

from Purdue University, to 2012. He became Chief of the Selection and Assignment Research

Unit of the U. S. Army Research Institute (ARI) for the Behavioral and Social Sciences in 1989,

and held that position until his retirement. Dr. Rumsey played a major role in two landmark

projects to improve the Army’s selection and classication system, Project A and Building the

Career Force. A special interest of Dr. Rumsey’s was meeting the Army’s needs for quality soldiers

Contributors

xxxiv

in the 21st century. He launched two projects in this area, one on noncommissioned ocers and

one on junior enlisted soldiers. Dr. Rumsey has published extensively in the elds of selection

and classication, performance measurement, and leadership, including editorship of the 2012

Oxford Handbook of Leadership in 2012 and senior editorship of the 1994 Erlbaum book Personnel

Selection and Classication. He is past president of the Society for Military Psychology and was a

recipient of the division’s John C. Flanagan Lifetime Achievement Award. He currently serves as

Associate Editor of the journal Military Psychology.

Marina Sagud, M.D., Ph.D., is Assistant Professor in the School of Medicine, University of

Zagreb, and also a Head of the Department for Schizophrenia and Psychotic Disorders in

the Department of Psychiatry, University Hospital Centre Zagreb. She is currently leading the

project: “The Inuence of Acute Stress Reaction and Depressive Disorder on the Cardiovascular

Pathology,” sponsored by University of Zagreb. She has organized nine postgraduate courses

in clinical use of antipsychotics and antidepressants at the School of Medicine, University of

Zagreb. She has published 45 articles cited in the “Current contents” base, and has (as of January

31, 2019), 860 citations in the Web of Science, H-index = 17. She was awarded for scientic

productivity by the University of Zagreb in 2011 and was a mentor of the student work which

received a Dean’s award in the School of Medicine, University of Zagreb, in 2018.

Renata Sargon is a fourth-year student in the clinical psychology Ph.D. program at Palo

Alto University. She received her Bachelor of Science in psychology and Bachelor of Business

Administration in marketing and Masters of Education in community counselling from Loyola

University Chicago. Renata is a Licensed Professional Counsellor in the state of Illinois, where

she worked in long-term care facilities for individuals diagnosed with severe mental illnesses

as a Psychiatric Rehabilitation Services Director and consultant. Renata is currently a member

of Dr. Bongar’s Clinical Crises and Emergencies Research Lab at PAU and is a practicum

student at Santa Clara Valley Medical Center. She is also an In-Custody Instructor for the New

Opportunity Work program at Goodwill of Silicon Valley, where she completed her third-year

practicum at their Wellness Center. Her primary research interests include crisis intervention

training for police, the psychology of terrorism, and suicidality.

Senior Master Sgt. Susan J. Scapperotti is currently serving as the Air National Guard

Recruiting and Retention Course Manager at Joint Base San Antonio, Lackland AFB, Texas.

She is assigned to JBSA-Lackland on a Statutory Tour by the Air National Guard Readiness

Center, Joint Base Andrews AFB, Maryland. She leads formal training for both ANG instructors

and students within the Air Force Recruiting School located at the 344 Training Squadron.

She entered into Active Duty Air Force in November of 1996 and began her recruiting career

in January 2000. Her career advanced as she was selected for elevated operational positions. In

2006, she transferred to ANG recruiting duty and earned the Air Force Meritorious Medal for

exemplary performance. Her notable lectures on generational understanding for recruiting and

management provide relevant training throughout the Air Force.

Bettina Schmid, Ph.D., Clinical Psychologist, is an ocer with the United States Army Reserve

and has served on active duty in the Army and Air Force. During her time on active duty, she

spent three years serving as a psychology consultant to leaders and soldiers in Army Recruiting.

She also works at the Salt Lake City VA in telemental health. Her areas of expertise include PTSD,

substance use disorders, and gerontology.

Contributors

xxxv

Matthew B. Schwartz, Ph.D., teaches ancient history and literature in the Departments of

History and Near East Studies at Wayne State University. He is a Contributing Editor of Menorah

Review and Associate Editor of the Journal of Psychology and Judaism. Dr. Schwartz has authored

or co-authored six books and numerous articles that deal largely with Graeco-Roman and

Jewish thought. The books include Roman Letters: History from a Personal Point of View and several

works in partnership with Dr. Kaplan, including A Psychology of Hope; Jewish Approaches to Suicide,

Martyrdom, and Euthanasia; and The Family: Biblical and Psychological Foundations.

Leah Shelef, Ph.D., is former Head of the Psychology Branch, Air Force IDF Mental Health

Department, Israeli Medical Corps (reserve), Air Force, IDF Mental Health Department, Israeli

Medical Corps. Dr. Shelef is a clinical social worker and a senior expert in the eld of suicide in

the IDF. Her doctorate eld of research was “Distress, Personality Resources, Gender Subjective

Experience and Suicide Facilitating Process among Soldiers Who Have Attempted Suicide,”

received from Bar-Ilan University in Israel. Dr. Shelef has published more than 30 papers; more

than 20 are original papers, reviews, and book chapters—most of them are in the eld of suicidal

behaviour among Israeli soldiers.

Yifat Erlich Shoham, Ph.D., is currently the Surgeon General of the medical forces in the Israeli

Air Force, IDF Israeli Medical Corps. Before her current commission, Dr. Erlich-Shoham was

the head of the Aero-Medical Center, the head of the Medical Classication and Occupational

Medicine Branch at the IDF Surgeon General Headquarters, and commander of the clinical

wards at Tel Nof and Palmachim Air Force Bases. She is in active position at the IAF Medical

Evacuation and Rescue Unit.

Col. Tracy D. Smith is the Chief of Recruiting and Retention for the Air National Guard, Joint

Base Andrews, Maryland. She provides strategic direction, resources, training, policy, and guidance

to support 90 Air National Guard Wings, 54 states, territories, and the District of Columbia’s

recruiting and retention programs. She gathers, analyzes, monitors, and reports metrics in support

of Air National Guard recruiting and retention plans and programs to the Oce of the Secretary of

Defense, Headquarters Air Force, Chief National Guard Bureau, and Director of the Air National

Guard. Colonel Smith is responsible for analysis of recruiting and retention trends, ensuring that

national end strength meets operational mission requirements. She also oversees the development

of national advertising and marketing initiatives and partnerships. Colonel Smith served on active

duty as a traditional Guardsman and as an Active Guard Reservist in both sta and command

positions at the wing, state, and national headquarters level. Prior to her current assignment, she

was the Commander, 113th Mission Support Group, Washington, DC, Air National Guard.

Matthias Soest is currently acting head of the Psychological Service in the German Army

and has more than 10 years of experience as a psychologist working for Multinational Joint

Headquarters, for the Special Forces, the U.S. Marine Corps in Quantico, and the German Army

Headquarters. He is a reserve ocer (LRRP) and has had multiple deployments to Afghanistan.

Jeanne Mager Stellman, Ph.D., is Professor Emerita, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia

University. After retirement from Columbia, she became Professor and Chair, Environmental

Health Sciences, and Associate Dean for Research at the School of Public Health at SUNY-

Downstate Medical Center in Brooklyn, New York, for ve years before returning to Columbia

as a Special Lecturer. She is President of Columbia’s Emeritus Professors in Columbia (EPIC)

Contributors

xxxvi

fellowship and continues to be actively engaged in research on Vietnam veteran health, generally

in collaboration with Prof. Steven D. Stellman. They are currently carrying out a mortality study of

a cohort of American Legionnaires they have followed for decades. With support of the National

Library of Medicine, Stellman oversaw the creation of a popular website: Agent Orange Data

Warehouse. Stellman has also worked in areas of environmental and occupational health, including

research on World Trade Center recovery workers’ health. She has written several seminal books

on occupational health and many monographs and chapters and peer-reviewed publications.

She created the Women’s Occupational Health Resource Center at Columbia (1981–1991) and

served as Editor-in-Chief of the ILO Encyclopaedia of Occupational Health and Safety, 4th edition

(1998). Honours include a Guggenheim fellowship, Preventive Oncology Academic Awards,

Principal Investigator of numerous grants, and being named one of Ms. Magazine’s “80 Women

to Watch in the 80’s.” Her papers are archived at Harvard’s Schlesinger Library. Stellman holds a

doctorate in physical chemistry from City University of New York (1972).

Steven D. Stellman, Ph.D., is Professor of Clinical Epidemiology at the Mailman School of

Public Health, Columbia University. He is a cancer epidemiologist with over 40 years’ experience

designing and conducting cohort and case-control studies relating chronic disease outcomes

such as cancer and heart disease to lifestyle and environmental risk factors. Prior to joining the

Columbia University faculty, he worked in both government and non-prot organizations. As

Chief of Epidemiology for the American Health Foundation, he directed studies of behavioural,

metabolic, and genetic factors in causation of tobacco-related cancers and environmental risk

factors for breast cancer. He was co-founder of Cancer Prevention Study II, an American Cancer

Society study of over 1.25 million men and women. At the New York City Department of Health

and Mental Hygiene, he served for three years as Assistant Commissioner for Epidemiology

and Biostatistical Research and Director of the Bureau of Vital Statistics and for eight years

as Research Director of the World Trade Center Health Registry, a cohort study of 71,000

survivors of the World Trade Center disaster. For the past 35 years, he has collaborated with his

wife, Dr.Jeanne Stellman, in numerous studies ofVietnam veterans. Dr. Steven Stellman has a

doctorate in physical chemistry.

Dubravka Svob Strac, Ph.D., works as Senior Research Associate at Laboratory for Molecular

Neuropsychiatry, Division of Molecular Medicine, RudjerBoskovic Institute, Zagreb, Croatia,

and holds a title of Assistant Professor at University of Osijek. She obtained her B.S., M.S., and

Ph.D. degrees in molecular biology at Faculty of Science, University of Zagreb. Additionally, she

graduated in project management at Accredited College of Business and Management, Zapresic.

She also obtained various short-term training at home and abroad and received several awards

and stipends. So far, she has published 59 (50 WoSCC) scientic papers (citations: 637; H-index:

16) and 15 book chapters. She coordinated 2 and actively participated in 10 national and 6

international projects. She is a lecturer at seven graduate and postgraduate courses at University

of Zagreb, Osijek, and Rijeka, and mentor of 14 B.S. and 4 Ph.D. theses. Dubravka Svob Strac

actively participates in the work of various scientic societies, organization of scientic meetings,

and science popularization. She is member of the editorial board of several and reviewer for over

50 international scientic journals, several congresses/symposia, biology school textbooks, and

Croatian Science Foundation projects. Her eld of research is molecular basis of stress-related

and neuropsychiatric disorders and molecular mechanisms of neuropsychoactive drugs.

H. Canan Sümer is a Professor at the Department of Psychology in Middle East Technical

University (METU). She received her Ph.D. in the area of industrial and organizational psychology

Contributors

xxxvii

from Kansas State University in 1996. Her research includes development of personnel selection

tests and techniques, personality assessment, performance management and culture, and leadership

and gender-role stereotypes. Dr. Sümer is on the editorial board of a number of national and

international journals in her eld. She is a member of the Turkish Psychological Association and

Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, and she has represented Turkey in EFPA’s

Assessment Board. She has led a number of large-scale projects on military personnel selection

and performance management, and was an active member of NATO HFM Panel’s task group

on Military Recruitment and Retention. More recently she was involved in a project sponsored

by the Scientic and Technological Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) in which a computerized

selection system along with an assessment centre was developed to be used in the selection of

blue-collar and white-collar employees. She is among the inventors of ve national and two

international patented inventions that came out of this selection system development project.

Dr. Sümer has national and international publications on the topics of job analysis, personnel

selection, performance management, and gender role stereotypes, and she is actively involved in

training human resource management practitioners through the programs of METU Continuing

Education Center.

Swati, Ph.D., is Scientist ‘C’ with Defence Research Development Organization (DRDO),

Ministry of Defence, India. Previously, she has served as an Assistant Professor in SUS College

of Research and Technology, Panjab. She is posted as a psychologist in Naval Selection Board,

Visakhapatnam, for selection of Naval Ocers. She has been awarded a commendation from

Chief of Eastern Naval Command in December 2016 for her outstanding work.

Lucija Tudor nished her M.Sc. of molecular biology on the Faculty of Science, University

of Zagreb, in 2016 and is currently a Ph.D. student of medicinal chemistry in the Department

of Biotechnology, University of Rijeka, Croatia. She is currently working as an assistant/Ph.D.

student in the Laboratory for Molecular Neuropsychiatry, Ruđer Boskovic Institute (RBI), on

the project “Genomic and Glycomic Biomarkers for PTSD,” led by Nela Pivac, nanced by

the Croatian Science Foundation. She has published seven journal articles and two chapters in

scientic books. She was awarded a FENS-IBRO/PERC travel grant for the 11th FENS Forum

of Neuroscience in Berlin in 2018. She actively presented preliminary results on glycomic and

genetic biomarkers of PTSD, aging, and cognition on four international symposia and is included

in popularization of science by active participation on the RBI manifestation “Open Days” for

two years.

Suzana Uzun, M.D., Ph.D., Assistant Professor, is a psychiatrist working at the University

Psychiatric Hospital Vrapče, Zagreb, and a subspecialist in biological psychiatry. She nished her

residency in psychiatry in Psychiatric Hospital Karlovac and in Clinical Hospital Center Zagreb,

Croatia. She was a leader of the scientic project “Side Eects of Antipsychotics,” founded by

the Ministry of Sciences, Education and Sports of the Republic of Croatia, a bilateral project

with Slovenia “The Role of 5-HT6 Receptors in Alzheimer’s Disease,” and is collaborator

on the project lead by Nela Pivac, funded by Croatian Science Foundation: “Genomic and

Glycomic Biomarkers for PTSD.” She has won several international awards provided by the

European Workshop on Schizophrenia, Davos, Switzerland (in 1999, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006,

2008), and Biennial Winter Workshop on Schizophrenia, Montroux (2006). She organizes with

Oliver Kozumplik a postgraduate course, “Side Eects of Psychopharmaceutic Drugs,” School

of Medicine, Zagreb University.

Contributors

xxxviii

Kristen J. Vescera, M.A., is a fourth-year graduate student at Palo Alto University. She

receivedaBachelor of Arts degree at Syracuse University in English and textual studies and

geography.

After travelling to Latin American countries for a year assisting high school and college

students in volunteer projects across Costa Rica, Honduras, and Nicaragua, she developed an

interest in working with adolescents. She moved to Denver, Colorado, and received a Master

of Arts degree from University of Colorado Denver in counselling psychology and counsellor

education with an emphasis in school counselling. Following graduation, she enlisted in the

United States Army Reserves as a Psychological Operations Specialist and immediately deployed

to Afghanistan in support of a nine-month combat operation. Kristen is currently a reserve Sta

Sergeant who teaches psychological operations doctrine to junior enlisted service members. She

is interested in working with active duty and veteran populations within the larger context of

policy and program development.

Nicola von Luedinghausen is a teaching and operational psychologist at the EOD Training

Facility and also a trained sport psychologist with deployment experience in Afghanistan.

Nirit Yavnai is currently the Head of Medical Research Directorate, Academy and Research

Branch, Israeli Medical Corps. Dr. Nirit Yavnai, D.M.D., M.P.H., joined the Academic Reserve

Ocers Program and received her D.M.D. degree from the Faculty of Dental Medicine, Hebrew

University, in 2000. She was awarded a M.P.H. degree from the school of Public Health, Haifa

University, in 2008. She nished her residency in public health dentistry and received her

specialist license in 2012. Her military service started in 2000 as a dental surgeon in the Medical

Corps and she served in command assignments in the military dental services and in the Israeli

Navy. After nishing her residency in public health, she was assigned at the Academic & Research

Branch as the head of the Research Promotion section. Her current assignment as the head of

the research directorate in the IDF and IMOD includes a dual assignment with responsibility of

prioritizing, funding, and promoting medical research in the IDF and MOD. Her publications

and elds of interest include military medicine and public health education, epidemiology of

infectious and chronic diseases, and health promotion.

xxxix

FOREWORD

Both the challenges and rewards of military psychology stem from the breadth of the discipline. If

you introduce yourself as a clinical psychologist, it is pretty clear what you do for a living. A social

psychologist presenting a paper at a social psychology conference will nd him/herself surrounded

by others who share a similar conceptual and methodological approach to the discipline. The same

is true for just about all of the standard subdisciplines of psychology. But to tell someone that you are

a military psychologist conveys little information beyond your focus on the population you study.

In all likelihood, your doctoral degree is not in military psychology. Instead, it is in experimental,

cognitive, social, clinical, counselling, or industrial psychology (just to name a few). Your degree

may not even be from a psychology department. About half of engineering psychologists and

human factors engineers obtain their education from graduate programs in engineering.

This interdisciplinary nature of military psychology is illustrated in Figure 0.1. For simplicity’s

sake, this Venn diagram has only three circles (there could be more) representing clinical,

experimental, and applied psychology. Clinical psychology includes all avours of that discipline,

including counselling and neuropsychology. Experimental psychology includes cognitive,

animal learning, social, cognitive neuroscience, and other areas that focus on the basic science of

behaviour. Applied psychology includes industrial, organizational, and engineering psychology.

Clinical

Military psychology

Applied

Experimental

Figure 0.1 Military psychology in context.

Foreword

Military psychology resides in the shaded portion of the Venn diagram where the three circles

of clinical, experimental, and applied psychology overlap.

Another feature of military psychology that distinguishes it from other disciplines is the

international nature of the topics of interest within the eld. In my 35-plus years as a military

psychologist, I have observed time and again that issues of interest to U.S. military psychologists

are of equal interest to military psychologists around the globe. Perhaps this is not surprising

given that the economic, social, political, and technological factors that determine the nature of

war are not isolated within a given country or region. Coupled with its interdisciplinary nature,

this common bond of interest across dierent nations adds to the rich diversity of military

psychology.

To paraphrase comments of the great early experimental psychologist Herman Ebbinghaus,

military psychology has a long past but only a short history (Boring, 1950). Because of the intense

nature of warfare, understanding the psychology of the soldier and factors that aect his or her

performance were just as important to the armies of ancient Greece or China as they are to

contemporary military leaders. Sun Tzu (1983) did not seek the counsel of psychologists, but a

careful reading of his Art of War reveals deep insights into the psychology of war. Great generals

have always been astute observers of human nature. Similarly, ancient literature such as Homer’s

Iliad and Odyssey reveal deep insights into the nature of war and of soldiers.

Military psychology as a distinct area of science and practice followed psychology’s emergence

as an independent discipline in the late 19th century. War drives developments in science in

general, and this is true for psychology as well. The rst great accomplishment of military

psychologists occurred during World War I, when the U.S. Army called upon members of the

American Psychological Association to devise aptitude tests to help it screen recruits and assign

them to jobs tting their abilities. World War II stimulated the origins of engineering psychology

and provided a signicant boost to clinical psychology. Vietnam led to the recognition of post-

traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as a diagnosable and treatable psychopathology. More recently,

the Global War on Terror (GWOT) is giving rise to developments in cyber-psychology and

mental health training (Matthews, 2014a).

A feature of contemporary military psychology is the further blurring of traditional

disciplinary lines. Consider combat stress, for example. Once thought to be “psychological”

in nature—that is, a learned, maladaptive response to the extreme stress of combat—it is now

recognized that to fully understand PTSD, a range of factors must be considered. PTSD is more

than a learned response. Vulnerability to the consequences of combat stress such as PTSD and

depression may be inuenced by neurochemistry (Chottekalapanda, Greengard, & Sagi, 2019).

Genetic factors play a role in susceptibility (Martindale, 2019). Brain trauma, classied as mild

traumatic brain injury (mTBI) or chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), shares an overlap

of symptoms with PTSD (Matthews, 2014b). Symptoms similar to PTSD may also occur in

the absence of the experience of a traumatic event, per se, and are referred to as moral injury

(Meagher & Pryer, 2018). Thus, the eorts of a diverse array of psychologists and other scientists

are needed to fully understand and then to develop eective means of preventing and treating

combat stress disorders.

Human nature has not changed, but the social and physical environment in which war occurs

has. So-called Phase Zero operations involve shaping the social and political attitudes of people

within a nation targeted by a hostile force.

Social media provides the perfect weapon to achieve

this goal. Through the clever use of social media, hostile powers may directly manipulate the

1 For a discussion of Phase Zero operations, see https://www.cgdev.org/blog/phase-zero-pentagons-latest-big-idea

Foreword

xli

beliefs and attitudes of millions of people. These manipulations may create discord and confusion

through the spread of misinformation or “fake news.” It is imperative that military psychologists

develop expertise in understanding this weaponisation of social media.

The physical environment may also oer new challenges. Megacities, dened as cities of

10million or more inhabitants, are rapidly emerging. There are dozens such cities now, and

many more are expected to develop in the coming decades. Many of these cities are seedbeds of

discontent, with wide disparities of access to basic human needs such as healthcare or education.

If only one percent of the inhabitants of a megacity are hostile forces, that means that in a

city of 10 million people there would be 100,000 potential adversaries. And these adversaries

would have an intimate knowledge of the terrain and culture of that city. The psychological

impact of deploying an army to ght in such an environment is not currently well understood

and represents an area of increasing concern for military strategists and military psychologists

(Strategic Studies Group, 2015).

Rapid developments in neuroscience are also contributing to military psychology. A better

understanding of the human brain, genetics, and neurobiology raises the very real possibility

of creating an “engineered” soldier. That is, these sciences may be leveraged to produce a

soldier that can ght longer and harder than normal human beings. Altering brain chemistry

could inoculate soldiers against combat stress or allow them to function at peak eectiveness

for extended periods of time. Brain implants may enhance learning and memory skills of

soldiers. Epigenetic manipulations may allow enhancement of a wide spectrum of soldier

capabilities (for a full treatment of human performance optimization science, see Matthews&

Schnyer,2019).

Historically, wars were planned and conducted by men. The growing acceptance of women

in the military requires the continued attention of military psychologists. Nations dier in

their specic policies concerning the utilization of women in the military, but they share the

need for objective and honest information about this issue that military psychologists can

provide. The same may be said for the inclusion of other groups of people including gay, lesbian,

and transgender people in military service. As warfare evolves from an exercise in brute force

(picture Roman centurions hacking away at opponents with swords) to an exercise in cognitive

dominance (Matthews, 2014a), the rationale for war being a primarily male enterprise is eroding.

Another area of contemporary contributions of military psychology is in developing a better

understanding of non-cognitive factors in soldier performance. Since World War I most of the eorts

of military psychologists to understand soldier performance have centred on cognitive factors, such

as intelligence and aptitude. In what I call the “25/75 Rule” (Matthews, Lerner, & Annen, 2019),

cognitive factors account for about only a fourth of the variation in soldier performance. Non-

cognitive factors such as motivation, grit, hardiness, and positive character strengths make up the

remaining 75%. Unpacking this remaining 75% of variation in soldier performance represents an

important challenge and a major contribution for today’s military psychologists.

It is in this conceptual and historical space that The Routledge International Handbook of Military

Psychology and Mental Health unfolds. In a single volume, these topics and more are addressed by

the world’s leading military psychologists. The contributors of this book represent nations from

multiple continents with dierent histories and cultures. This diversity of perspective strengthens

the content of this volume and adds to its credibility as an authoritative source of the broad and

deep eld of military psychology. A perusal of the Table of Contents illustrates the Venn diagram

introduced above. This is not a book about clinical military psychology, experimental military

psychology, or applied military psychology. Rather, it is the blending of all three conceptual and

methodological approaches. The resulting Gestalt is, indeed, a case where the whole is greater than

the sum of its parts.

Foreword

xlii

References

Boring, E. G. (1950). A History of Experimental Psychology (2nd edition). New York: Appleton Century Crofts.

Chottekalapanda, R. U., Greengard, P., & Sagi, Y. (2019). Molecular and cellular aspects of major depressive

disorder. In M. D. Matthews & D. M. Schnyer (Eds.), Human Performance Optimization: The Science and

Ethics of Enhancing Human Capabilities (pp. 62–89). New York: Oxford University Press.

Martindale, V. E. (2019). Optimizing cognitive performance: Genetic and epigenetic techniques. In M. D.

Matthews & D. M. Schnyer (Eds.), Human Performance Optimization: The Science and Ethics of Enhancing

Human Capabilities (pp. 287–301). New York: Oxford University Press.

Matthews, M. D. (2014a). Stress among UAV operators: Posttraumatic stress disorder, existential crisis, or

moral injury? Ethics and Armed Forces: Controversies in Military Ethics and Security Policy, 1, 53–57.

Matthews, M. D. (2014b). Soldier’s heart, shell shock, combat fatigue, posttraumatic stress disorder: Bio-

behavioral disorder or social construction. Paper presented at the Columbia University Conference on World

War I, 17 October 2014.

Matthews, M. D., Lerner, R. M., & Annen, H. (2019). Non-cognitive ampliers of human performance:

Unpacking the 25/75 rule. In M. D. Matthews & D. M. Schnyer (Eds.), Human Performance Optimization:

The Science and Ethics of Enhancing Human Capabilities (pp. 356–382). New York: Oxford University Press.

Matthews, M. D., & Schnyer, D. M. (2019). Human Performance Optimization: The Science and Ethics of Enhancing

Human Capabilities. New York: Oxford University Press.

Meagher, R. E. & Pryer, D. A. (2018). War and Moral Injury: A reader. Eugene, OR: Cascade.

Strategic Studies Group. (2015). Chief of Sta of the Army, Strategic Studies Group-III, Final Report, Executive

Summary. Arlington, VA: CSA SSG.

Tzu, S. 1983. The Art of War. New York: Delacorte Press.

Michael D. Matthews, Ph.D.

Professor of Engineering Psychology

U.S. Military Academy

xliii

PREFACE

Psychology, being the science of human behaviour, has always a signicant role to play across all

settings that involve humans. Accordingly, numerous branches of the discipline have ourished

and keep ourishing as the multi-componential aspects of human involvement attract the

attention of the scientic world. From child development, schools, societies, industries, and

various organizations to clinics, everywhere the scientic role played by psychology is so

vast and vivid that the setting itself justies the existence of specic subdisciplines like child,

developmental, organizational, or clinical psychology and so on and so forth. As nations exist, so

do their militaries, which are considered the most crucial human assets. The critical signicance

of military personnel for nations and the complexities of this extreme profession deserve and

have drawn a concrete focus of the behavioural scientic community in the form of military

psychology. Though applications of psychological principles are inevitable from the inceptions of

the rst-ever thoughts of having militaries or similar security forces, military psychology as a full-

grown scientic and research profession had grown not much earlier than the last three decades.

With very scarce literary works in the past, the rst major dedicated professional volume surfaced

in 1992: Handbook of Military Psychology by Gal and Mangelsdor (1992). Mingled with their

personal military experiences and scientic acumen, the editors attempted to put together the

applied domain of military psychology and its principles and practices. Around two decades later,

Laurence and Matthews (2012) brought the Oxford Handbook of Military Psychology, presenting

the discipline in a refreshed and more newly emerged perspective. An eort was further made by

Bowles and Bartone (2017) to extend and add the specic direction of clinical and organizational

practice to the discipline. With only these few major works and rarely any others, the scope of

the ever-emerging eld of military psychology remains vastly unaddressed. The present volume

is an attempt to refresh the existing, extend to the required, and cover the uncovered domain of

military psychology.

Taking the path initiated by the predecessors ahead, The Routledge International Handbook of

Military Psychology and Mental Health is an endeavour to dedicate scientic focus to the service

of those who dedicate their lives in the service of their nations. Systematically and concisely

arranged in three broad section heads encompassing 35 chapters, the volume puts together the

scholarly knowledge of internationally acclaimed experts in the eld working across dierent

corners of the world. The rst section focuses on “The Roots and the Journey” of the discipline.

Preface

xliv

The section has eight chapters presenting deliberations on the beginning, continuation, and

expansion of applications of psychological principles in militaries during war as well as peace

times, evolutions of military-specic testing and some associated research areas, applications of

culture and cognition in the domain, the signicance of military psychology in future warfare,

and its prospective directions as a scientic discipline, along with delving into various ethical

issues and concerns at the global level.

The second section of the volume is loaded with professional discussions on “Soldiering:

Deployment and Beyond.” Though the section contains only 11 chapters, the scope of this

section is much more elucidative and comprehensive. The concretely inherent roles and

applications of military psychology in the form of sustainable leadership development through

resilience building, hardiness training, and enhancement of virtues and character strengths among

military personnel are at the centre of scholarly deliberations in this section, and the aspects

of military recruitment, assessment, bravery, training, lone-wolf terrorism, military turnover,

family reintegration, post-traumatic growth, and transition from military to civil life have been

thoroughly enumerated and discussed in light of empirical evidence from across the globe. The

section begins to provide insight into mental related issues in militaries and draws attention

towards the applications of military psychology into the same, which is explicitly furthered in

the third section of the volume.

The third section, “Making a Choice: Mental Health Issues and Prospects in Military,”

encompasses 16 chapters which bring together the eorts of military mental health professionals

in explaining the mental health issues prevailing in military life. Ranging from work engagement,

stress, coping, and burnout through other mental health and clinical concerns, like traumas,

morbidities, post-traumatic experiences, bio-physiological abnormalities, moral injury, and

suicidal behaviour related aspects in the military, the section delves into the requisite psychological

interventions at the individual as well as family level in order to make resilient soldiers and veterans.

The issues highlighted in this section, which are seemingly the most crucial for the attention

of psychologists and other mental health professionals, have barely found such a synthesized

collection at one place in any earlier work. The importance of this largest section of the volume

is the reason which calls for the title Handbook of Military Psychology and Mental Health. The

handbook intends to serve scientic professionals in the eld to provide fruitful directions to

their research eorts, military professionals to work towards the growth and ourishment of

the personnel and the organization, mental health professionals to dedicate their services to the

needed, policy-makers and strategists to devise various modalities in necessary directions, and

lay readers to enlighten them about the complexities of military as a profession and military

psychology as a scientic discipline.

Bringing this volume in such a literarily barren area has been quite a herculean task, but it has

been a call of my duty as a military psychologist with experience of around three decades. What is

delighting is the overwhelming response and forthcoming contribution of the globally renowned

scholars, scientists, and stalwarts who have shared their in-depth knowledge in this endeavour of

service to military personnel and the profession of military psychology. I am deeply indebted to

all these contributing authors, although conveying a simple gratitude to them cannot be enough

for such a giant cause. My gratitude goes to all those who have lent their support in any possible

manner for this venture, and most importantly I oer my deep felt sense of indebtedness to

Susannah Frearson, Heather Evans and Joanne Forshaw at Taylor and Francis Group for their

unconditional support and relentless ecient strivings to publish this gigantic volume. I have a

strong belief that this volume will be a ready reference to all those who are in any way connected

with military and military psychology, and it will prove to be a milestone in the progress of the

discipline of military psychology.

Preface

xlv

References

Bowles, S. V., & Bartone, P. T. (2017). Handbook of Military Psychology: Clinical and Organizational Practice.

Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.

Gal, R., & Mangelsdor, A. D. (1992). Handbook of Military Psychology. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Laurence, J. H., & Matthews, M. D. (2012). The Oxford Handbook of Military Psychology. New York: Oxford

University Press.

Updesh Kumar, Ph.D.

Scientist ‘G’ & Head Mental Health Division

Defence Institute of Psychological Research (DIPR)

Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO)

Ministry of Defence, India

PART I

Military psychology: e roots

andthe journey

MILITARY PSYCHOLOGY IN

WAR AND PEACE

Anappraisal

Swati Mukherjee and Updesh Kumar

Psychology as a modern ‘scientic’ discipline has been a close ally of modern warfare, the

two having established a mutually benecial relationship, especially during the rst half of

the twentieth century and since. Military psychology has over the years established itself as a

unique sub-discipline that determines its boundaries not through methodological concerns or

subject content, but rather through its ability to optimally full the requirements of the Armed

Forces in specic contexts and under unique circumstances, making use of the advancements

in the broader discipline of psychology. And in the endeavour, psychology has visibly made

signicant contributions to the military. Perhaps it is not an exaggeration to say, as Matthews

says, ‘psychology is more relevant and viable today for the military, than at any point in history.’

(Matthews, 2014, P. 215). The growth of the sub-discipline of military psychology has been in

tandem with the developments in the art and science of warfare. However, in the post–Cold War

era with the international political equations rapidly changing, and in view of the unprecedented

technological developments in the mechanics of warfare, the fundamental nature of war itself has

undergone a metamorphosis. In this context, it becomes imperative for military psychologists

to take stock of the discipline by asking the eternal question, as Bingham asked while striving

to discern the pressing problems of military psychology, in the ‘chaotic days between war and

peace’ after the Second World War – ‘What are the continuing problems of military psychology?’

(Bingham, 1947, P. 155). It is the same question that military psychology is faced with today

even after the passage of half a century. The question seems to be gaining more relevance with

increasing ambiguities and complexities of warfare, and the blurring boundaries between war

and endeavours for peace. The present chapter begins by delineating the current standards of

research and practice in military psychology in the context of the major historical trends in the

discipline. Subsequently, it engages with the quintessential question of the dynamics between

war and peace, and the precarious balance between the two, seeking to emphasise the need to

enhance interaction between the domains of peace psychology and military psychology. The

chapter concludes with an argument for structuring a nuanced ethical framework for research

and practice of military psychology in order to prevent the discipline from becoming a mere

cog in the machineries of war.

Swati Mukherjee and Updesh Kumar

Psychology during the World Wars

The primary role of psychology in the military is to support and assist the armed forces in achieving

their goals by ensuring tness of selection, capability building through training and sustained

mental tness for eective operation under varied circumstances. And in this vein, beginning

from the days of the First World War, military psychologists have been consistently working in

tandem with the militaries of the countries on both sides of the Atlantic, although some of the

authors reviewing the development of the discipline are of the opinion that psychology had a

very limited scope in the military in the early years of the twentieth century. Reviewing the role

psychologists played during the Great War (1914–1918), Shephard (2015), for example, says that

the military scarcely knew about psychology, especially in Britain. Providing a succinct account

of contributions of psychology to the war eort during the First World War, Shephard (2015)

says that in Britain the role of civilian psychologists was limited mostly to treating ‘shell-shocked’

soldiers in military hospitals, drawing on their medical expertise and experience. Dr.Charles

Meyers, for example, was appointed the Consultant Psychologist to the rst Royal Army Medical

Corps, and established mental health hospitals in tents behind the enemy lines in France. It was

only in the later years of the war that some of these pioneering psychologists (e.g. Myers, Rivers,

Spearman) could nd some more signicant and relevant applications of psychology in various

branches of the military. No attempt, however, was made to apply psychology to the testing of

military recruits (Shephard, 2015, P. 944). At the same time, psychologists in Europe had a better

say in military matters. Shephard (2015) describes how Wilhelm Wundt, among other prominent

cultural and academic gures, supported the German army’s stance against Belgium. Many of

those involved in war were students of Wundt, due to which greater relevance was accorded

to psychology in the war eorts on both shores of the Atlantic. Germany was a pioneer in

establishing the discipline of psychology, and the German military benetted from the industrial

expertise gained by psychologists in the pre-war years. As a result, Germany started using aptitude

tests for the selection of pilots, truck drivers, radio operators and other specialists as early as 1915.

Psychologists performed many specied tasks for the German military, which did not have

any long-term impact on the discipline – for example, a ‘listening device’ developed by Max

Wertheimer for locating enemy artillery. On the other hand, certain explorations by psychologists

while serving in uniform laid the foundations of later research in the elds of leadership, combat

motivation, fatalism among soldiers and the like. Psychologists can be credited with making

the German war eort ‘more scientic, rational and modern’ (Shephard, 2015, P. 945), and for

demonstrating to the state the practical usefulness and applicability of the discipline, resulting in

the creation of new positions of psychology in technology institutes and commercial academies

(Geuter, 1992). Akin to Britain, France too had minimal involvement of psychologists in the war

eort, wherein they devised some psycho-physical measurements of heart rate and respiration of

machine gunners, but none of these countries employed large-scale military testing.

On the other side of the Atlantic, as the United States of America entered the war in the

year 1917, psychologists with industry experience found useful employment in the military.

The contributions of Walter Dill Scott and Robert M. Yerkes are remarkable in this era of

early development of psychology in the military. By the end of the war, the Committee on the

Classication of Personnel in the Army, which tested men for their aptitude in various elds of

the military using Scott’s techniques, had interviewed and classied thousands of men. Yerkes

was a pioneer in initiating a more formal association of psychology with the military, and, along

with Terman, Goddard and a few others, is credited with the development of Army General

Classication Tests (Army Alpha and Army Beta), measures that allowed for testing of large

samples simultaneously. Reviewing the status of military psychology, Melton (1957) remarks that

Military psychology in war and peace

during the First World War, psychologists also engaged in development of job-knowledge tests,

training of naval gunners, analysis of aircraft pilot ability and perhaps many other areas, of which

written records no longer exist. Among other consequences, the implementation of large-scale

testing in the military gave impetus to psychology in the United States and eventually led to the

establishment of the Division of Psychology in the oce of the Surgeon General of the U.S.

Army in the year 1917 (Mangelsdor & Gal, 1991). On the whole, while some researchers go to

the extent of claiming that ‘social and clinical psychology received a signicant boost from the

First World War and a new branch of the profession emerged in the shape of military psychology’

(Bourke, 2001), it is reasonable to conclude that the First World War at the minimum provided

for conditions where psychology could envisage a new role for itself in the military.

The Second World War witnessed exponential expansion of the applications of psychology

in the military, both in Britain and in the United States. Britain recruited a large number of

psychologists in various branches of the armed forces, including the areas of personnel selection

and health care systems (Hughes, McCauley, & Wilson, 2019). Signicant contributions were made

by psychology to the military eorts, and in recognition, the American Psychological Association

(APA) included the Division of Military Psychology (Division 19) among its rst group of formal

subdivisions in the year 1945. A committee to evaluate the work of psychologists and psychiatrists

in the armed forces during the war years was set up by the then-prime minister Winston Churchill.

The committee reported upon the vital role played by the group in war, and as a result psychologists

gained an ocial entry in the British civil services post war. Similarly, remarkable progress was being

made in Germany in nding applications of psychology to military settings. Germany had made

preliminary beginnings in this area during the First World War, wherein psychological technique

was being applied for selection of drivers, pilots, wireless operators, sound detector operators and

anti-aircraft personnel. After the war ended, the war ministry issued orders for development of

psychology in the army, leading to rapid developments in the areas of personnel selection, resulting

eventually in mandatory psychological testing using the ‘whole personality approach’ for selection

of all armed forces ocers (Fitts, 1946). Also, while much attention was given to selection in

the armed forces by the German psychologists, not much contribution was made towards using

psychology for structuring training. Similarly, clinical psychology found very limited application

in an environment where decisions regarding psychogenic problems of soldiers were governed by

military policy, rather than psychological advice. German psychologists diered signicantly in their

methods of analysis, as their focus was more on subjective analysis rather than objective testing.

Meanwhile, in the United States of America, with the beginning of the Second World War,

a large number of psychologists were recruited into the Armed Forces for research studies and

technical applications. The single largest programme implemented by the Army Air Force focused

primarily on psychological selection of personnel, and in the later years included problems of

training and prociency measurement (Melton, 1957). Research programmes in other domains

of the military were also focused primarily upon personnel selection. Utilisation of the expertise

and services of psychologists was on a piecemeal basis, and was yet to nd a systematic application

in military operations. Over the years, psychology gradually made a valued place for itself within

the military sciences, nding vast and varied applications across domains. Personnel selection by

ensuring person-job t continues to be a prime focus in general in most of the nations, while

clinical intervention, man-machine interface and human factors engineering have expanded

to study adaptations to complex machine environments. With ever-newer applications of

information technology, especially in the domain of articial intelligence, cognitive-behavioural

applications of psychology have expanded immensely. Along with personnel selection, training,

leadership and maintaining the morale of the troops continue to be core areas of research in

conventional units as well as in non-conventional military formations and deployments.

Swati Mukherjee and Updesh Kumar

Post–World War military psychology

The world plunged into a prolonged era of uneasy peace post the Second World War. International

relations remained tense and nations continually strived to achieve a balance. As war was replaced

by diplomacy, the nations strived to nd alternative means of attaining and defending national

interests. As the distinction between wartime and peacetime targets got blurred, so did the

distinction between civil and military targets. As the boundaries became fuzzy, the services

of experts, including the psychologists utilised by the military, were deemed indispensable

(Herman, 1995). With innovative research paradigms emerging in the broader subject domain

of psychology, and with the emergence of a dynamic interface between social and behavioural

sciences, military psychology rapidly expanded its horizons and created an important space for

itself in military policy in the context of changed geo-political global arrangements. Postwar

years produced newer kinds of warfare, e.g. guerrilla or jungle warfare and countless insurgencies

across many Third-World nations. Psychology emerged as a mainstay for formulation of policies

and strategies in this context. As Herman (1995) puts it, ‘the combination of unchecked weapons

of technology and underdeveloped social technology was poisonous. Psychological expertise

was among the only antidotes’ (P. 125). Psychological research ourished during these years,

especially in the United States, where the military wholeheartedly supported it. A major domain

of psychological research eort in the military was dedicated to the designing of an ideological

war against perceived enemies, and psychology increasingly became an essential component

in military strategy and foreign policy. Lessons and insights learnt from the experiences of the

U.S. military during the Korean war in 1950 had reiterated the usefulness and reliability of the

military-psychology combination owing to research in domains such as brainwashing, mass

communication, persuasive communication and the like. The U.S. military reemphasised the

denition of war as a psychological struggle, where victory depended not only on military

superiority, but also on psychological strategising to weaken the enemy, and a laboratory that

provided for ever-newer opportunities for testing psychological theories and propositions.

(Herman, 1995). Military research support to psychology in the Cold War years and the resultant

uninching support of psychology to the American military, though immensely benecial and

boosting for the development of the discipline, also drew strong criticism on moral and ethical

grounds, especially after the Department of Defense’s Project Camelot came to light in the shape

of an international scandal in the year 1965. Project Camelot was a major plan with a strong

psychology component to involve behavioural experts in predicting and controlling Third-World

revolutions and development in order to gain an upper hand internationally (Herman, 1995).

The recent years have seen major changes not only in the nature and techniques of warfare,

but also in the very paradigm of war. With the rise of terrorism and the ‘war on terror’ in the

post-9/11 years, the concept of war has undergone a metamorphosis. Conventional warfare that

had a denitive enemy force as the opponent, most often controlled by another nation-state,

is being replaced by an ambiguous enemy and non-state actors controlling these forces across

international borders. Military forces of most developed nations and many of the developing

nations are involved in or are contributing towards engaging these non-state actors in controlling

most acts of terrorist violence. This involvement is either direct (e.g. U.S. military forces in the

Middle-East or Asia) or as a part of the United Nations Peace Keeping contingent (e.g. Indian

Armed Forces deployed in South Sudan). In both instances, the stated purpose of military action

is to establish or maintain peace by defeating or subduing the violence perpetuated by non-state

actors. The world has been witnessing perpetual and multiple armed conicts in recent years. At

the time of the present lines being written, there are at least 25 armed conicts taking place across

the world, as reported by the Council of Foreign Relations, an American non-partisan think

Military psychology in war and peace

tank. Changing rules of engagement and increasing ambiguities have resulted in innumerable

controversies and contentions regarding the role of the military in dealing with terror groups and

organisations, insurgents and non-state actors. Under the circumstances, two major themes need

to be highlighted and deliberated upon in order to structure the future directions the discipline

of military psychology would take.

The rst theme pertains to the need to evolve a perspective stance for military psychology, and

the nature of its contributions towards military endeavours. Although it is rational to assert that

‘Supporting the military’s understanding of human behaviour is not tantamount to advocating

war’ (Laurence & Matthews, 2012, P. 3), the increasingly complex denition of warfare and

the ambiguity of sociopolitical environments inherent in most contemporary conicts make it

imperative for the discipline of military psychology to be well informed about the ethical pitfalls

of advocating value-free scientic knowledge. The second equally pertinent theme that demands

attention of contemporary military psychologists across nations is regarding the scope and nature of

the subject matter of military psychology. Though dened and usually delimited by the operational

concerns of the militaries of the home countries, the scope and applications of military psychology

must be expanded beyond understanding war. As Matthews (2014) says, both war and peace are

essentially human phenomena, and scientic understanding of human behaviour can help explain

and structure both the conditions. As psychology has made a move from understanding disease and

pathology to understanding resilience and positive behaviour, in the same vein military psychology

can no longer ignore making a move from understanding war to understanding peace.

Military as a peace-builder: Role of psychology

About a century ago, Clausewitz (1918) famously dened war as continuation of politics by

other means, and viewed it as an act of violence intended to compel our opponent to full

our view. In the contemporary world scenario, with ever-increasing ambiguities in making

a distinction between friend and foe, psychology has found a renewed relevance owing to its

potential to inuence policy and politics. As it is true for the present epoch that it is a period

of perpetual conicts, so it is also true that never before have so many nations and groups come

together in the pursuit of world peace. Peace is not mere absence of conict, but is marked by

combined eort of people and nations in working towards common good, social cooperation,

empathy and pro-social behaviour (Matthews, 2014). Matthews (2014), in his aptly title book

Head Strong, emphasises the potential of psychology in bringing about this shift from war to

peace. He describes in some detail the increasing interface between the APA division of Military

Psychology (Division 19) and the APA division for Peace (Division 48 – Society for the Study

of Peace, Conict and Violence), and the shared vision of a peaceful world by the members of

both divisions. Emphasising the need to recognise the signicance of resolving disputes and

conicts through peaceful dialogue and negotiations, he also questions the disparities in the

funding of military research and research on peace psychology. Extending his argument and

calling for action in the same direction, he suggests certain concrete domains where military

psychology can contribute in order to facilitate the move from war to peace. Quoting from

Matthews (2014, Pp. 217–221), some such domains are: changing mindsets of populations to

replace ‘xed’ mindsets with ‘growth’ mindsets that have been shown to promote favourable

intergroup relations and amenability to negotiation; facilitating intergroup cooperation using

social psychological techniques of common goals, as demonstrated by the classic Robber’s Cave

experiments done by Sherif and colleagues (1988); using the operant conditioning paradigm

of rewards and punishments to enhance the likelihood of desirable political behaviour and

furthering peaceful behaviour by using tools developed by social psychology over the years.

Swati Mukherjee and Updesh Kumar

In the years after the Second World War, the United Nations (UN) organisation has played

a signicant role in delimiting conicts across the globe. Along with using military force drawn

from its member nations for peacekeeping, a few years ago, the UN called for a greater willingness

on the part of the international community to address the basic economic, social, political and

ethnic causes of conict (Boutros-Ghali, 1992). This implied recognising the structural forms

of violence that lie at the roots of most violent conicts. An ideological understanding of the

structural roots of violence can be facilitated through psychological research in the domains of

relative deprivation, intergroup dynamics, prejudice and stereotypes and identity dynamics.

One of the most signicant domains where psychology has grown in the post–World War years,

especially during the Cold War era, is the use of cognitive and social psychological research for

designing and disseminating publicity material and propaganda for inuencing public opinions in

favourable directions, initially by the American military, and subsequently by the Central Intelligence

Agency (CIA). Though being utilised since the days of the First World War, these psychological

operations (psy-ops) reached their peak propensity during the Cold War years, when a bipartisan

agreement was reached among U.S. political leaders about the essentiality of beating the Soviet

Union and countering its communist propaganda using any means possible (Wolfe, 2018). These

vast array of intellectual and cultural instruments being utilised for spreading ‘American values’ in

countries with potential communist inuence during the Cold War years were largely discontinued

by the United States after the fall of communism in the post-1991 world (Leonard, 2002). However,

in view of the ‘war on terror’ in the post-9/11 world, need for ‘public diplomacy’, i.e. persuasive

communication (or propaganda) with the populations overseas for the purpose of convincing them

of the legitimacy of the U.S. military actions against terror outts, has gained ever more importance.

Leonard (2002) provides many examples across nations (e.g. governments in Kosovo, Greece and

Italy faced uncertainty in the face of volatile public opinions) in recent decades, where popular

public perceptions rather than governments set the pace for international diplomacy. In this context,

international public diplomacy has attained a new perspective and signicance, though in the current

era of easily accessible information, a much greater nesse would be required to make an impact on

public perceptions and opinions. Military psychology thus has a potent area of renewed research and

application open to its eorts in making a move from assisting war to building peace by nding the

psychological process of ‘building relationships, starting from understanding other countries’ needs,

cultures, and peoples, and then looking for areas to make common cause’ (Leonard, 2002, P. 50).

A related area of concern while military psychology looks forward to expanding its scope

to inuence peace processes is evolving a critical and nuanced awareness of desirable ethical

standards of research and application.

Psychology for the military: Focus on ethics of the profession

Ethics have been dened as ‘the agreed upon standards of aspirational and mandatory behaviours

and practices’ (Leong, Altmaier, & Johnson, 2008, P. 182) by the members of a specic group.

Professional ethics set the aspirational standard of behaviour for the member of a profession

in a manner that distinguishes the malum in se (bad in itself) from malum prohibitum (wrong

only because law prohibits it). In simple words, this means that the members of the group are

expected to internalise the prescribed standards of professional practice as inherent values of the

group and adhere to these under all circumstances, and not only in order to avoid punishment.

In this sense ethics are placed on a higher level than law, as ethical practice implies uninching

adherence to the ‘good’ and refraining from the ‘bad’ voluntarily, without any external inuence

or compulsion. The crucial question of dening the ‘good’ and the ‘bad’ in professional contexts

lies upon the professional body and the ideological stance taken by it.

Military psychology in war and peace

While many researchers recognise and elaborate upon the ethical issues and dilemmas in the

eld of research and applications of military psychology (e.g. Frey, 2017; Johnson & Landsinger,

2017; Staal & King, 2000), most discussions pertain to the ground-level problems of practicing

psychology in clinical or organisational settings within complex operational environments.

Looking for a broader ideological stance for the discipline, that would dene and shape the

research endeavours and delimit the contours of scientic application of knowledge thus

generated, one comes across a void. There are hardly any discussions on the ontology of military

psychology, though the apparent epistemological stance it takes is largely positivist. Devoid

of philosophical debates about the nature of knowledge and lacking any critical examination

of assumptions underlying theories and constructs, military psychology in its current form

exemplies stark positivist science, that is unambiguously based on observation of ‘facts’ or ‘data’,

linked by rigorous logic to hypotheses or theories (Manicas & Secord, 1983). Military psychology

as a part of the traditional eld of military studies has always stood as an apolitical, atheoretical

and largely quantitative approach to scientic understanding (Basham, Belkin, & Gifkins, 2015).

Military psychology has grown exponentially in the last century as a discipline majorly rooted

in the American ethos. Despite a declared adherence to the highest American values of freedom

and democracy and bound by the professional ethic of protecting and promoting the mental

health and well-being of those they serve, military psychologists (as represented by the APA) have

faced severe criticism in recent years for certain stark actions and decisions taken in apparent

disregard of any critical self-appraisal. Murray, Lyubansky, Miller and Ortega (2014) have critically

examined the APA’s refusal to condemn the use of torture or of acknowledging the involvement

of its members in designing and implementing abusive interrogation and detention techniques

used by the military and CIA against terror suspects. Though they attribute this blind adherence

of the APA with the military to the historical closeness of American psychology with the military,

it is also reective of the ideological shortsightedness of the discipline. While looking for friends

and allies in the ‘global war against terror’ to achieve the elusive target of a peaceful world, such

ideological unawareness is proving detrimental.

In order to break out of the current mould and move towards peace building, the discipline

of military psychology needs to evolve a reexive and critical awareness of its ideological

positioning and value preferences. The rst and foremost requirement in this regard is to develop

an acceptance of the inherently interpretive nature of the peace-building ventures, which must

rely upon understanding cultural diversities and co-constructing peace as an ongoing process.

A value-based perspective rooted in critical self awareness is the rst step towards developing a

psychology for the military that truly serves the purpose of making the world a more peaceful

place. The Herculean but essential task of evolving a psychology for the military that goes beyond

nding utilitarian solutions for the forces and helps in creating a value-based critical awareness

of actions and decisions in an environment of perpetual ambiguities might be the stepping stone

of the path that leads towards a peaceful world. A move from militarism to peace building would

inevitably rely upon an ideologically aware and critically reexive avatar of military psychology

that accepts the simultaneous existence of multiple perspectives, does not divide the world into

dichotomies and breaks down hierarchies to minimise power asymmetries and perceived moral

superiorities of certain groups and nations.

Conclusion

The present chapter focuses upon the need for reconceptualizing the role and subject matter

of military psychology in the context of the contemporary socio-political realities fraught with

perpetual violence and multilayered conicts. It situates the discipline in historical context by

Swati Mukherjee and Updesh Kumar

tracing its major developments since the First World War up until the present era. It highlights

the intertwined nature of military and the discipline of psychology especially in the USA. As

the discipline of military psychology has come to be dominated by the American perspectives,

these historical inuences are now shaping the structure and ideological stance of the discipline

in general. The chapter concludes by highlighting the anomalies in two concomitant domains

where the authors see possibilities for change in the positive direction. First domain is about

redrawing disciplinary boundaries and redesignating disciplinary priorities in order to make a

move from facilitating war to establishing peace as the ultimate aim. The second domain which

arises from this shift, both as a prerequisite and as an outcome of the same, is the grave need for

the discipline to achieve clarity about its ideological positioning.

The idea of replacing war with an alternative is not new. William James (1910/1995, p. 17),

questioning the necessity of war says, “The war against war is going to be no holiday excursion

or camping party. The military feelings are too deeply grounded to abdicate their place among

our ideals until better substitutes are oered than shame and glory that come to nations as well as

to individuals from the ups and downs of politics and the vicissitudes of trade.” It is heartening to

note that even in the early days of psychology he saw a potent role for the discipline for making a

transition from war to peace. Realizising that militarism is too deeply rooted in the psyche of the

individual and the society to even imagine a military-less world, he emphasises the need to nd an

alternative that would create opportunities for the human virtues to emerge and shine, as militarism

does. This goal of nding a substitute for militarism that creates opportunities for a goal-oriented,

hardy, seless and resolute human character to emerge can very well be fullled by psychologists by

creating alternative pathways that channel human energies in a positive and constructive manner.

The core point propagated by the present chapter, thus, is that the discipline of military

psychology inherently holds the potential for transforming the very nature of war to the extent

of eliminating it altogether at some point in the future, replacing it with peaceful cooperative

striving. Such transitions have become imperative, and psychology with its immense propensity

to bring about change can become the ag bearer in transforming the world altogether.

References

Basham, V. M., Belkin, A., & Gifkins, J. (2015). What is critical military studies? Critical Military Studies, 1(1),

1–2.

Bingham, W. V. (1947). Military psychology in war and peace. Science, 106, 155–160.

Bourke, J. (2001). Psychology at war, 1914–1945. In G. C. Bunn, A. D. Lovie, & G. D. Richards (Eds.).

Psychology in Britain: Historical Essays and Personal Reections (pp. 133–149). Leicester, UK: BPS Books.

Boutros-Ghali, B. (1992). An agenda for peace: Preventive diplomacy, peacemaking and peace keeping.

International Relations, 11(3), 201–218.

Clausewitz, C. V. (1918). On War, Vol . 1 . London: Kegan Paul, Trnch, Trubner & C.

Fitts, P. M. (1946). German applied psychology during World War II. American Psychologist, 1(5), 151–161.

Frey, R. A. M. (2017). Ethical challenges for military psychologists: When worlds collide. Ethics& Behavior,

27(4), 283–296.

Geuter, U. (1992). The Professionalization of Psychology in Nazi Germany. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Herman, E. (1995). The Romance of American Psychology: Political Culture in the Age of Experts. Berkley:

University of California Press.

Hughes, H., McCauley, M., & Wilson, L. (2019). History of military psychology. Journal of the Royal Army

Medical Corps, 165(2), 68–70.

James, W. (1910/1995). The moral equivalent of war. Peace and Conict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 1(1), 17–26.

Johnson, W. B., & Landsinger, K. L. (2017). Ethical issues in military psychology: Clinical and organizational

practice. In S. V. Bowles & P. T. Bartone (Eds.). Handbook of Military Psychology (pp.105–224). Cham,

Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.

Military psychology in war and peace

Laurence, J. C. & Matthews, M. D. (2012). The handbook of military psychology: Anintroduction. In J. H.

Laurence & M. D. Matthews (Eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Military Psychology (pp. 1–3). New York:

Oxford University Press.

Leonard, M. (2002). Diplomacy by other means. Foreign Policy, 132, 48–56.

Leong, F. T. L., Altmaier, E. M., & Johnson, B. D. (2008). Encyclopaedia of Counseling, Vol. 1 . Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.

Mangelsdor, D. A. & Gal, R. (1991). Overview of military psychology. In R. Gal & D. A. Mangelsdor

(Eds.). Handbook of Military Psychology (pp. xxv–xxxvi). New York: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Manicas, P.T. & Secord, P. E. (1983). Implications for psychology of the new philosophy of science. American

Psychologist, 38, 399–413.

Matthews, M. D. (2014). Head Strong: How Psychology Is Revolutionizing War. New York: OxfordUniversity

Press.

Melton, A. W. (1957). Military psychology in the United States of America. AmericanPsychologist, 12(12),

740–746.

Murray, H., Lyubansky, M., Miller, K., & Ortega, L. (2014). Toward a psychology of non-violence. In

E.Mustakova-Possardt, M. Lyubansky, M. Basseches, & J. Oxenberg, (Eds.). Toward a Socially Responsible

Psychology for a Global Era (pp. 151–182). New York: Springer.

Shephard B. (2015). Psychology and the great war, 1914–1918. The Psychologist, 28, 944–946.

Sherif, M., Harvey, O. J., Hood, W. R., Sheri, C. W., & White, J. (1988). The Robbers Cave Experiment:

Intergroup Conict and Cooperation. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.

Staal, M. A. & King, R. E. (2000). Managing a multiple relationship environment: The ethics of military

psychology. Professional psychology: Research and practice, 31(6), 698–705.

Wolfe, A. (2018). Freedom’s Laboratory: The Cold War Struggle for the Soul of Science. Baltimore,Maryland: Johns

Hopkins University Press.

WAR, PEACE AND THE

MILITARY IN BIBLICAL AND

ANCIENT GREEK SOCIETIES

Matthew B. Schwartz and Kalman J. Kaplan

This chapter oers a comparison and contrast as to how ancient Greek and Biblical civilizations

viewed peace and war and soldiering. Wars always involve violence, suering and death, often

of innocent people. Yet Biblical and ancient Greek views on warfare dier notably. Wars in the

Bible can be very violent and destructive. Good ghters were honored, as were people who

were successful in other endeavors. “Saul has slain his thousands and David his ten thousand,”

sang the women, and II Samuel 22 tells of the exploits of some of David’s best warriors. Yet war

is not gloried for its own sake by the Bible. Wars are fought at best under certain guidelines

and for aims that the Bible describes, largely to achieve God’s purposes for human history. On

some occasions, the Bible will mandate the destruction of a culture that has deviated too far

from morally acceptable behavior. Yet this seems fundamentally unlike the picture of ghting in

ancient epics like the Iliad in which violence seems to be admired as an end in itself and which

delight in describing in gory detail the slaughter on the battleeld, totally disconnected to any

purposes of God’s.

The contrast between Biblical and ancient Greek attitudes towards heroism and violence in

battle can be seen in the combats between Achilles and Hector and between David and Goliath.

These two narratives seem paradigmatic of dierent attitudes underlying the nature of conict

in these two cultures. Goliath and the Philistines of his day, ca. 1030 BCE, appear to have been

one group among the mass of so-called Sea Peoples, who moved from various points west to the

Eastern Mediterranean ca. 1200 BCE. One group came close to toppling the Egyptian Empire

in about 1170 BCE. Another group destroyed the Hittite Empire. Others conquered parts of

the Eastern Mediterranean seaboard, including Ugarit and the Gaza area. It is almost certain that

some of the Sea Peoples came from Greece and spoke Greek. By the mid-eleventh century, they

were adjusted to the languages and cultures of their new homelands, but it is very possible that

Goliath and his contemporaries still maintained certain ties to their Greek past, its lifestyle and

traditions. Perhaps Goliath knew the story of the siege of Troy and of Achilles (approximately

1300 BCE), and perhaps aspired to be like him. If, as some ancient writers suggest, Homer was

possibly Phoenician or Egyptian, it is not impossible that Homer, who composed the Iliad in

the eighth century BCE, knew something of the story of David and Goliath. In any case, there

Matthew B. Schwartz and Kalman J. Kaplan

are certainly phrases in I Samuel 17, especially the description of Goliath’s armor, that seemed

Iliadic. Let us compare the two stories.

David and Goliath

Goliath is described as six cubits and a span tall, perhaps over nine feet. His armor alone weighed

5000 shekels. Descriptions of armor are not the norm in Scripture, and one is reminded of

Homer’s detailed description of Achilles’s armor in the Iliad. David, in contrast, was a young

shepherd with no armor, carrying a sta, a shepherd’s pouch and a sling with ve stones

(ISamuel 17: 38–40). The description of their combat further conrms the dierence between

the two protagonists (I Samuel 17: 42–54). Goliath is a warrior from his youth who aunts

the Israelites with a personal challenge, which he knows no one will accept. It is all a ploy to

demoralize the Israelite army, and it is highly successful. For 40 days, every morning and evening,

the giant comes forth and oers the same challenge, mocking the Israelites and their God. King

Saul has oered rewards of wealth plus his daughter’s hand in marriage to the man who can

meet the giant, but there are no takers. David now arrives at the camp. He is a ruddy, handsome

youngster, but he sees immediately the growing demoralization of the Israelite soldiers. He

goes to King Saul and tells him that he will ght Goliath. David has no promise of victory

from God, but he feels that someone has to stand up and ght for God and for His people. The

outcome will be up to God, but someone has to try. Though young, David is a person of deep

faith that God will do what He wants. David goes out quickly to meet Goliath, carrying his

sling with ve stones and an ability to use them expertly. Goliath seems surprised and shaken.

He goes through his usual pre-combat speech, threatening to give David’s body to the birds of

prey and the cattle, but David detects the uncertainty in Goliath’s hesitating approach and also

notes that Goliath threatened to give his body to the cattle (behema). Cattle, of course, are not

normally carnivorous, and David senses that Goliath is confused. He responds that the combat

will not be decided by human weapons but by God. David seizes the right moment and res a

stone into Goliath’s forehead, killing him. He then completes his astonishing victory by severing

Goliath’s head, at which the Philistines ee in panic, and the Israelites pursue them vigorously

(see Appendix).

A number of points should be noted in this story. First, violence is not gloried, nor is brute

strength. Goliath is experienced, well-armed and huge. David moves swiftly. More important,

Goliath has no purpose higher than just ghting, while David feels he is ghting for a higher

purpose. David prevails, and cuts o the head of Goliath, not as a show of valor but to intimidate

the Philistines.

Achilles and Hector

Let us compare this to the Iliad’s narrative of the combat of the Greek Achilles and the Trojan

Hector (Homer, 1860). Hector is described as family man, very human and aware of his

obligations to his family and to society; he has serious doubts about the behavior of his brother

Paris in abducting Helen from her husband King Menelaus of Sparta, thus instigating the war, but

Hector does nothing about it. Unlike David, Hector is terried of his much stronger adversary.

Achilles is described almost in Goliath-like terms. While not as huge, he is super-human and

invulnerable except for his heel. He is moody and ferocious as a warrior and seems to express

himself through violence. When the mortally wounded Hector proposes that the victor treat

the vanquished’s body with respect, Achilles angrily refuses, saying that he only wishes he could

bring himself to eat Hector’s body. The Achaean soldiers stab and mock Hector’s corpse. Then