military psychology essay

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

The PMC website is updating on October 15, 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

Cognitive Resilience to Psychological Stress in Military Personnel

Andrew flood.

1 University of Canberra Research Institute for Sport and Exercise, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT, Australia

2 Discipline of Psychology, Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT, Australia

Richard J. Keegan

3 Discipline of Sport and Exercise Science, Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT, Australia

Military personnel often perform complex cognitive operations under unique conditions of intense stress. This requirement to perform diverse physical and mental tasks under stress, often with high stakes, has led to recognition of the term ‘tactical athlete’ for these performers. Impaired cognitive performance as a result of this stress may have serious implications for the success of military operations and the well-being of military service men and women, particularly in combat scenarios. Therefore, understanding the nature of the stress experienced by military personnel and the resilience of cognitive functioning to this stress is of great importance. This review synthesises the current state of the literature regarding cognitive resilience to psychological stress in tactical athletes. The experience of psychological stress in military personnel is considered through the lens of the Transactional Theory of stress, while offering contemporary updates and new insights. Models of the effects of stress on cognitive performance are then reviewed to highlight the complexity of this interaction before considering recent advancements in the preparation of military personnel for the enhancement of cognitive resilience. Several areas for future research are identified throughout the review, emphasising the need for the wider use of self-report measures and mixed methods approaches to better reflect the subjective experience of stress and its impact on the performance of cognitive operations.

Introduction

Stress and its impact on a range of cognitive processes continues to be a subject of intense scientific investigation. Ongoing research has led to the emergence of the concept of cognitive resilience , explaining the degree to which cognitive functions can withstand, or be resilient to, the effects of stress ( Staal et al., 2008 ). In military personnel, cognitively demanding tasks are regularly performed under stress, with a survey conducted by the U.S. Department of Defence finding that 87% of military personnel report experiencing at least some stress as a result of their work ( Bray et al., 2009 ). To denote these demands, the term tactical athletes was reportedly offered by the former chief of staff of the US Army ( Hammermeister et al., 2012 ). Because of the prevalence of stress and the fact that the performance of cognitive tasks often carries significant consequences, ensuring and promoting cognitive resilience in military personnel is a high priority. Indeed, the development of mental skills training programs in military settings ( Cohn et al., 2010 ; Jha et al., 2017a ) is, in part, a recognition of the importance of maintaining cognitive performance under stress. Importantly, cognitive resources are required for self-regulation of effort, attention and emotional control, with real implications for the management of daily living demands and mental health ( Martin et al., 2019 ; Rabheru et al., 2021 ; Rezapour et al., 2021 ).

In a previous review, we have demonstrated that military personnel are faced with a range of environmental stressors and that these stressors, including heat, cold and altitude, can have consequences for cognitive processes, including attention and working memory ( Martin et al., 2019 ). We have also synthesised the state-of-the-art evidence linking cognitive performance to physiological variations such as physical fatigue, sleep deprivation, nutrition and aerobic fitness ( Martin et al., 2020 ). This narrative review aims to extend upon this work by outlining the role of psychological factors in cognitive resilience. In the following text we review the concept of psychological stress and highlight how psychological processes of cognitive appraisal and coping can act to mitigate the effects of environmental stressors on cognitive performance in military personnel. While the effects of stress on cognition and operational performance have been the subject of several previous reviews (see Staal, 2004 ; Kavanagh, 2005 ; Driskell et al., 2006 ; Lukey and Tepe, 2008 ), the present paper is intended to provide an updated and targeted examination of the effects of psychological stress on cognition within a military context. Recent developments in the enhancement of cognitive resilience are also considered against existing and well-established theoretical models, in an attempt to highlight gaps in knowledge and areas for future investigation.

Cognitive Resilience: Applications and Theoretical Explanations

Although an all-encompassing definition remains elusive, in its use in the behavioural sciences, resilience is typically thought to involve two components: adversity and positive adaptation ( Luthar and Cicchetti, 2000 ). Accordingly, Luthar and Cicchetti (2000 , p. 858) define resilience as a process of displaying ‘positive adaptation despite experiences of significant adversity or trauma’. Resilience can also be framed as a trait, denoting certain personal attributes allowing an individual to positively adapt to demands ( Fletcher and Sarkar, 2012 ). In military settings, Mastroianni et al. (2008 , p. 43) draw heavily from Lazarus and Folkman’s (1984) Transactional Theory of stress (see “Psychological Stress” below), defining resilience as ‘the interaction between individuals and their environment that leads to the achievement and maintenance of effective health and performance under stress’. In all cases, this interest in resilience as a personal strength represents a polar shift away from examining risk factors associated with problematic or dysfunctional outcomes ( Rutter, 1987 ; Fergus and Zimmerman, 2005 ). The concept of cognitive resilience has followed from this literature to describe the specific effects of stress on cognitive functioning. Cognitive resilience has been defined by Staal et al. (2008 , p. 260) as the ‘capacity to overcome the negative effects of setbacks and associated stress on cognitive function or performance’. This definition maintains the core characteristics of psychological resilience in adversity - or in this case, stress - and positive adaptation.

There is a high degree of interest in cognitive resilience within the scientific literature, studying the resilience of a wide range of cognitive processes against the effects of stress in various populations. For example, Mujica-Parodi et al. (2008) examined the impact of body fat percentage on cognitive resilience, finding that those with higher body fat were less resilient to the effects of a real-world stressor (skydiving) on spatial processing, attention and working memory. In developmental neuropsychology, cognitive resilience has been used to explain individual differences in age-related declines in cognitive capacity ( Yaffe et al., 2009 ) and the development of cognitive impairment in Alzheimer’s Disease ( Arnold et al., 2013 ; Negash et al., 2013 ). In athletes, sustained attention, as assessed in a Stroop task, has been shown to be resilient to high levels of stress resulting from physical and academic demands ( Shields et al., 2017 ). The concept of cognitive resilience has also been applied to assess the effects of the unique stressors experienced by military personnel on cognitive functioning ( Morgan et al., 2002 , 2006 ; Hansen et al., 2009 ; Taverniers et al., 2011 ). Cognitive resilience is, therefore, important in many settings. In military settings populated by ‘tactical athletes’, successful cognitive performance under stress carries significant consequences. Before delving deeper, however, an issue that is inherent in the examination and theoretical explanation of cognitive resilience is the definition of what constitutes stress. Below, we highlight the complexity of the concept of psychological stress before reviewing situations where cognitive resilience to psychological stress is challenged in military personnel.

Historically, public and scientific interest in the concept of stress was borne out of what is now viewed as the stressors of war, particularly World War II ( Lazarus, 2007 ). Grinker and Spiegel (1945) wrote of the stress of war, with a focus on Air Force pilots. Military organisations were concerned with understanding the effects of stress on the performance of military personnel in battle, with the intention of using this information to inform the recruitment of those best able to maintain performance under stress ( Grinker and Spiegel, 1945 ; Lazarus and Folkman, 1984 ). In many ways, very little has changed, as evidenced by the military interest in the related concept of cognitive resilience described above. Importantly, however, the concept of stress permeated beyond the military setting and stress was recognised as relevant to the lives of civilians. For a comprehensive reflection on the history of stress research, we direct interested readers to Stress and Coping ( Lazarus, 2007 ). Below, we define psychological stress, drawing on the transactional theory of stress and coping, in order to contextualise the subsequent discussion of the effects of stress on cognition in military personnel.

Psychological Stress

The Transactional Theory of Lazarus and colleagues defined psychological stress as the ‘relationship between the person and the environment that is appraised by the person as taxing or exceeding his or her resources and endangering his or her well-being’ ( Lazarus and Folkman, 1984 , p. 21). Stress, therefore, involved a subjective component that mediated the stressor-response relationship ( Lazarus and Folkman, 1984 ). This definition emphasised the individual differences in responses to a stressor, proposing that one’s degree of vulnerability to stress was due to the ‘cognitive processes that intervene between the encounter and the reaction’ ( Lazarus and Folkman, 1984 , p. 23). Appraisal and coping were identified as the two cognitive processes mediating this person-environment transaction.

Appraisal is a cognitive process of evaluating the relevance of the person-environment transaction to one’s well-being ( Folkman et al., 1986a ). According to Lazarus and Folkman (1984) , appraisal occurs in two main forms. Primary appraisal is the evaluation of a person’s ‘stake’ in the person-environment transaction. This primary appraisal can be further classified into three forms. An irrelevant appraisal results from a transaction that is not deemed to be threatening. A benign-positive appraisal results from a person-environment transaction that is perceived as positive or expected to have a positive impact on well-being. Finally, stress appraisal results from a person-environment transaction that is perceived as negative or is expected to have a negative impact on well-being. Stress appraisal itself has three forms: harm, threat and challenge ( Lazarus and Folkman, 1984 ; Folkman et al., 1986a ). Briefly, harm appraisals relate to stressors that have already damaged an individual’s well-being, while threat appraisals relate to the anticipation of harm. Challenge appraisal results from a person-environment transaction that has the potential to promote personal growth after a degree of personal difficulty or challenge. Secondary appraisal involves the active evaluation of one’s capacity to manage the transaction, including the consideration of available coping resources ( Lazarus and Folkman, 1984 ). Importantly, as Lazarus and Folkman (1984) highlight, the use of ‘primary’ and ‘secondary’ is not intended to denote a temporal relationship, nor degree of importance for either appraisal process. Indeed, each category of appraisal interacts to produce the degree of stress experienced by the individual and the coping approach utilised for any given transaction ( Lazarus and Folkman, 1987 ).

Following the appraisal of the person-environment transaction, coping resources are mobilised to allow the individual to cope with the resulting stress. According to the Transactional Theory, coping is the ‘constantly changing cognitive and behavioural efforts to manage specific external and/or internal demands that are appraised as taxing or exceeding the person’s resources’ ( Lazarus and Folkman, 1984 , p. 141). What is emphasised in this definition is that coping – at least in its use in the Transactional Theory – is not an automated response to a stressor but rather an effortful process that evolves to reflect the changing nature of the person-environment encounter ( Lazarus and Folkman, 1984 ; Folkman et al., 1986a ; Lazarus, 2000 ).

The original Transactional Theory outlined two ways of coping: emotion- and problem-focussed coping ( Lazarus and Folkman, 1984 ). Emotion-focussed coping refers to coping strategies intended to regulate the emotional responses to the stressor, while problem-focussed coping strategies are used with the intention of impacting on or altering the stressor itself ( Lazarus and Folkman, 1984 ). However, Folkman (1997) later added a third category of coping, meaning-focussed coping. When stressors persist despite the activation of problem- and emotion-focussed coping, meaning-focussed coping strategies are initiated ( Folkman, 2008 ). This involves the use of beliefs, values and existential goals to find meaning in stressful encounters and to sustain coping efforts ( Folkman, 2008 ). This addition may prove to be particularly relevant to the management of stress in military settings, as discussed below.

The two cognitive processes of coping and appraisal are thought to interact in a number of ways. First, the appraisal of the person-environment transaction can impact on the use and effectiveness of coping approaches ( Baum et al., 1983 ; Folkman, 1984 ; Folkman et al., 1986b ; Lazarus and Folkman, 1987 ; Folkman and Moskowitz, 2000 ; Roesch et al., 2002 ; Nicholls et al., 2014 , 2016 ). For example, problem-focussed coping is more likely to be used and be successful if the person-environment transaction is appraised (secondary-appraisal) as within one’s control. Nonetheless, in cases where altering the transaction is difficult or impossible, emotion-focussed coping is more likely to be used. Appraisal and coping also interact through a process of reappraisal. Following coping efforts, a reappraisal of the changing person-environment transaction occurs ( Lazarus and Folkman, 1984 ), adjusting the perceived stress and the coping strategy used. In summary then, the Transactional Theory suggests that the appraisal, coping and reappraisal of the person-environment transaction mediates the intensity of stress that is perceived. Importantly, even at its inception, Lazarus and Folkman’s (1984) Transactional Theory proposed a dynamic and adaptive process; and this aligns well with the literature on cognitive resilience.

Despite the wide-spread adoption of the Transactional Theory in stress and coping research, numerous other categorisations of coping strategies have been formulated. For example, similar to the addition of meaning-based coping by Folkman (1997) , Billings and Moos (1982) added appraisal-focussed coping to emotion- and problem-focussed approaches. Approach and avoidance coping strategies, defined as ‘cognitive and emotional activity that is oriented either toward [approach] or away [avoidance] from threat’ ( Roth and Cohen, 1986 , p. 813), have also been widely investigated. Skinner et al. (2003) conducted a comprehensive review into the categorisation of coping strategies, which identified literature on 400 coping strategies, leading to criticism of both the emotion-focussed vs. problem-focussed and approach vs. avoidance classifications. They argued instead for a categorisation based on ‘action types’, outlining 12 families of action types that correspond to challenges and threats to relatedness, competence and autonomy. Distinct ‘root action tendencies’ align with those families identified in this hierarchical model and include, for example, support seeking, problem solving, escape and submission. Each family of root action tendencies then distill down to lower-order coping approaches such as help seeking, strategizing, procrastination and self-blame. This hierarchical model is now widely cited and has been applied in military settings ( Rossetto, 2015 ).

Upon reviewing this research on psychological stress, we therefore highlight the importance of subjective perception in the experience of stress, arguing that a stressor causes stress only if is perceived as stressful ( Roesch et al., 2002 ). By outlining the role of cognitive appraisal, coping and reappraisal, this literature has expanded our understanding of the individual differences in the stress experienced as a result of a perceived or anticipated stressor. This understanding of stress provides a context through which we can begin to understand cognitive resilience as defined by Staal et al. (2008 ; see above). We extend upon this discussion of the nature of stress and its impacts on cognition below, by discussing the psychological stress experienced in military settings before addressing the impact that this has on cognitive performance.

Psychological Stress in the Military

Significant efforts have been made to profile the types of stressors that military personnel are exposed to. These efforts have identified a wide range of both military-specific and non-military-specific stressors that military personnel must overcome, or be resilient to, in order to maintain psychological and cognitive functioning. After an extensive investigation of the nature of the stressors experienced in military operations, Bartone et al. (1998) identified five overarching dimensions of stress reported by U.S. military personnel. These included isolation, ambiguity, powerlessness, boredom and danger . Later, Bartone (2006) added a sixth dimension of workload to account for the increasing demands placed on military personnel in the form of longer working hours and increased frequency of deployments. Encompassed within these six dimensions are a range of specific stressors reported by military personnel, including separation from family and friends ( isolation ), the fluid nature of the mission ( ambiguity ), an inability to influence changes occurring back home ( powerlessness ), repetitive work ( boredom ), the risk of injury or death ( danger ) and the high frequency of deployment ( workload ; see Bartone, 2006 for comprehensive review). We note here that the stressors identified were collected using self-report measures. As a result, they represent stressors that have been appraised as stressful, aligning with the definition of psychological stress provided by the Transactional Theory.

From the dimensions identified in such analyses, much of the stress experienced by military personnel has parallels with the stressful experiences of civilian populations. For example, stress relating to workload extends well-beyond military settings, with workload considered a major contributor to occupational stress and burnout ( Jex, 1998 ). Similarly, boredom is a common complaint across a range of occupational domains ( Fisherl, 1993 ). Research in non-deployed military personnel certainly supports this argument, with work-related stressors such as changes in responsibilities, staffing and work hours being the most commonly reported sources of stress ( Pflanz, 2001 ; Pflanz and Sonnek, 2002 ; Pflanz and Ogle, 2006 ). It is clear from these findings that interventions aiming to reduce stress and its impact on the cognitive functioning of military personnel should not disregard the prevalence of these common occupational stressors.

However, unique, military-specific stressors are also well recognised. These stressors often come in the form of combat stress, i.e., the particular requirement to take actions that may end another human’s life, or indeed the risk of losing one’s own life. As such, combat stress may result from a range of stressors, including exposure to life threatening events or the injury and death of others ( Dekel et al., 2003 ; Hoge et al., 2004 ). In a survey of U.S. army personnel deployed to Iraq, almost all report being shot at (93%) or seeing dead bodies or human remains (95%). However, reported exposure to these stressors was significantly reduced in those deployed to Afghanistan ( Hoge et al., 2004 ). Similar findings have been reported in an Australian military sample, with the threat of injury or death, seeing dead bodies, the death of a friend or co-worker, and causing death or injury to others, all listed as potentially traumatic events experienced by Australian military personnel on peacekeeping missions ( Hawthorne et al., 2014 ). At this time, more work is needed to extend beyond simply cataloguing the combat stressors faced by military personal by assessing the appraisal of these stressors. In order to collect such data, validated measurement tools of appraisal and coping (e.g., Mikulincer and Florian, 1995 ) alongside qualitative interviews conducted during operational debriefing, may provide an appropriate mixed-methods approach. It is likely that this approach will clarify whether these reported combat stressors, or potentially traumatic events, are appraised as stressful, an important distinction according to the Transactional Theory of psychological stress.

The evolving nature of modern military operations presents as a challenge to profiling the types of stressors that cause psychological stress in military personnel. In their outline of the stressors of modern war, Mastroianni et al. (2008) discussed the evolving environment within which military personnel now operate and how this impacts on the types of stressors that are experienced. In particular, they highlighted the shift from traditional warfare to the constant threat of unpredictable insurgent attack in current operations in Iraq. This method of warfare is thought to remove the traditional concept of a ‘front-line’, leaving military personnel under constant threat of attack ( Mastroianni et al., 2008 ), also referred to as being in a state of ‘persistent conflict’ ( Casey, 2011 ). The health implications of this chronic psychological stress are perhaps most clearly represented by the high rates of post-traumatic stress disorder in military personnel returning from Iraq and Afghanistan ( Hoge et al., 2004 ). Whether similar deleterious effects are seen in cognitive functioning during deployment or, indeed, afterwards. Are yet to be determined, but there is accumulating evidence that – in the wider population - sufferers of PTSD do tend to also exhibit memory and attention deficits, associated with changes in functional brain activity ( Hayes et al., 2012 ).

Advancements in technology have also produced significant changes in modern military combat. The increased use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), in particular, represent this advancement in military technology ( Bone and Bolkcom, 2003 ). Although the use of UAVs removes the threat of physical harm to the pilot, recent research suggests that UAV pilots experience high levels of psychological stress ( Fitzsimmons and Sangha, 2010 ; Chappelle et al., 2014 ; Armour and Ross, 2017 ; Chapa, 2017 ). In their detailed description of the experiences of UAV pilots, Fitzsimmons and Sangha (2010) highlighted the psychological closeness that is developed between the UAV pilot and their target – for example during extended observation of daily movements - and how this closeness may account for the psychological stress that operatives experience. The physical separation from the battlefield also presents as an issue for the psychological stress experienced by UAV pilots, with many commuting to a military base from their homes each day ( Armour and Ross, 2017 ). This leaves little time for the pilots to ‘decompress’ and make the difficult mental transition from the warzone to civilian life ( Fitzsimmons and Sangha, 2010 ). These factors, and likely many more, emphasise the importance of continuing the investigation into the psychological stress of modern warfare and its impact on cognitive performance. However, technological advancement, such as virtual reality, also offers an opportunity to combat the effects of stress on performance, a point discussed later in this review. The close intertwining of stress and cognitive performance is exemplified in the UAV concept, perhaps particularly because the physical demands, and physical threat are removed, and yet combat stress remains closely linked with, and dependent on, cognitive performance. Developments such as the proliferation of UAV warfare help to explain the renewed emphasis on cognitive resilience in tactical athletes.

Cognitive Resilience to Psychological Stress in the Military

As outlined above, military personnel experience a range of both military-specific and non-military-specific psychological stress. Similarly, certain cognitive functions are of particular importance in military contexts. Investigations of cognition in military personnel have adopted a range of neurocognitive tools assessing memory, visuospatial integration, reaction time and executive functions ( Morgan et al., 2006 , 2011 ; Orantes-Gonzalez and Heredia-Jimenez, 2021 ). These cognitive domains are thought to be important for performance within a military context, for example, in navigating unfamiliar territory, executing orders while resisting distraction or reacting to unexpected threats. Indeed, the ongoing modernisation of warfare places additional demands on soldiers’ capacity to monitor and respond to multiple sources of information ( Kerick and Allender, 2004 ; Spivak et al., 2019 ; Bequette et al., 2020 ). Executive functions of inhibition, shifting and updating appear to be especially and increasingly relevant to the military context ( Blacker et al., 2019 ) and efforts to improve executive functioning translate to improved performance in simulated, military-relevant tasks ( Biggs et al., 2015 ). However, it should be noted that military personnel perform diverse tasks that engage a range of cognitive domains ( Blacker et al., 2019 ), such that what is essential in one role (e.g., artillery operator) may not apply in another (e.g., air traffic controller). Examinations of cognitive resilience, then, should adopt a tailored approach that consider the cognitive challenges and stressors specific to individual roles.

In investigating the effects of stress on these military-relevant cognitive functions, researchers are faced with the challenge of inducing stress in ecologically valid ways. One approach has been to use stress inoculation training methods, also referred to as sustained operations (SUSOPS) training ( Vrijkotte et al., 2016 ). The field phase of Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape (SERE) training ( Doran et al., 2012 ), which involves subjecting military personnel to a mock prisoner of war interrogation, has been shown to impair reaction time, attention, vigilance, memory and reasoning ( Lieberman et al., 2005a , 2016 ; Morgan et al., 2006 ). In another assessment of the effects of SERE training, Harris et al. (2005) examined stress-induced changes across multiple cognitive domains including reaction time, working memory and reasoning. Interestingly, only simple reaction time was shown to be impaired following SERE training, while either no change or improved performance was observed in more complex cognitive tasks such as spatial processing. It is suggested that the allocation of effort towards these more complex cognitive operations can temporarily mask the deleterious effects of stress ( Harris et al., 2005 ). This argument for the adaptive and protective function played by the allocation of resources will be compared to alternative theoretical explanations below (see “Psychological Stress and Cognitive Performance: Theoretical Explanations”) and is central to the ongoing development of conceptual frameworks for cognitive resilience and mental fatigue in athletes ( Martin et al., 2015 ; Filipas et al., 2020 ).

Beyond SERE training, Lieberman et al. (2005b) assessed the effects of U.S. Navy Seal training on cognitive performance. They report impaired reaction time, vigilance, attention and memory during the particularly intense ‘Hell Week’ portion of the program, which involves severe sleep deprivation and exposure to environmental, psychological and physical stressors ( Lieberman et al., 2002 ). Similar stress-induced impairments in cognitive performance have been reported in paratrooper training ( Sharma et al., 1994 ; Taverniers et al., 2011 ) and other stress inoculation simulations ( Taverniers et al., 2010 , 2013 ). As these training environments are designed to mimic many of the characteristics of military operations, such as sleep loss, physical discomfort, perceived threat and intense physical activity, the reported decrements in cognitive performance may be representative of the expected changes occurring in active military operations.

An important limitation of the research presented above, however, is the lack of subjective measurement of stress. Therefore, although some research suggests that military training environments and simulations induce psychological stress ( Kreuz et al., 1972 ; Morgan et al., 2000 ), the degree to which changes in cognitive functioning are due to the psychological appraisal of these situations remains largely unclear. Attempts have been made to overcome this issue by reporting on changes in subjective perceptions of task load ( Taverniers et al., 2010 , 2011 ) and mood ( Harris et al., 2005 ; Lieberman et al., 2005b ) that occur during training simulations. However, these measures do not directly assess psychological stress as defined by the Transactional Theory of stress ( Lazarus and Folkman, 1984 ). Future research should use established measures of both state and trait perceived stress, such as visual analogue scales ( Hellhammer and Schubert, 2012 ) and the Perceived Stress Scale ( Cohen et al., 1983 ), to uncover the degree to which these training simulations induce psychological stress and whether this psychological stress impacts on cognitive performance. The inclusion of both subjective and objective measures of stress may help refine the protocols used for military training operations to better reflect and combat the apparent impact of subjective stress appraisal on cognitive functioning.

Psychological Stress and Cognitive Performance: Theoretical Explanations

Despite numerous attempts, the development of a comprehensive theoretical explanation of the effects of stress on cognition, has proven difficult. This difficulty is due to the complexity of both stress and cognition. For example, the source of stress and its intensity, controllability and duration have all been shown to influence the changes observed in cognitive functioning ( Sandi, 2013 ). The characteristics of the specific cognitive operation under investigation also influences the degree of resilience to stress ( Sandi, 2013 ). Theoretical explanations of cognitive resilience must account for the range of possible consequences resulting from these interactions between stress-related and cognition-related factors. It is beyond the scope of this review to fully account for the number of theories that have been presented to explain the effects of stress on cognition. Instead, in the following text we highlight a sample of the theoretical explanations that have been widely adopted, particularly in military psychology. It is not our intention here to argue for one particular theoretical position. Rather, we aim to identify common themes that permeate across theories, in order to provide a framework through which to consider the findings presented above regarding the extent to which cognitive functioning in military personnel can be made resilient to psychological stress.

Maximal Adaptability Model

Hancock and Warm (1989) provide a model of the effects of stress on cognitive performance. This model, referred to as the Maximal Adaptability Model acknowledged that the cognitive task itself is a primary source of stress. In their dynamic model, Hancock and Warm (1989) argued that psychological and physiological adaptive mechanisms act to buffer the effects of stress on performance. Here, psychological adaptation refers to the allocation of attentional resources. This borrowed heavily from Kahneman’s (1973) theory of attention and effort allocation, where attention was presented as a limited, depletable resource. Physiological adaptation refers to homeostatic regulatory functions that attempt to accommodate the effects of stressors ( Hancock and Warm, 1989 ).

The Maximal Adaptability Model predicts that when stressors are minor, psychological and physiological adaptations can effectively buffer any disruptions to performance. However, as stressors progress to the extremes of hyper- or hypo-stress, limits of maximal psychological and physiological adaptability may be exceeded, resulting in dynamic instability. Overall, Hancock and Warm’s (1989) dynamic model suggests that hyper- and hypo-stress impacts on cognitive performance by depleting attentional resources and overwhelming homeostatic control systems. Given the high intensity and extended duration of the stressors associated with the military simulations described above, it is likely that limits of psychological and physiological maximal adaptability were exceeded. This would account for the observed impairments in cognitive functioning. Therefore, the dynamic model of Hancock and Warm (1989) may (still) serve as a theoretical explanation for the effects of stress on cognition in military settings. However, while physiological responses to stress inoculation training have been examined ( Taverniers et al., 2010 , 2013 ; Taylor and Schatz, 2011 ), the deployment and depletion of attentional resources (psychological adaptation) during training simulations, and indeed during active combat, require examination.

Compensatory Control Model

A similar explanation of the impact of stress on performance is presented in Hockey’s (1997) Compensatory Control Model. Two levels of control are proposed in this model. In well-learned tasks under conditions of low stress, performance is maintained by an automatic system of control that does not tax limited energetic resources. When task demands are registered by an ‘effort monitor’ as exceeding the capacity of this lower automatic system, a higher supervisory controller is activated to initiate a compensatory control response. This response may involve the mobilisation of effort to protect task performance. However, much like attention in the work of Hancock and Warm (1989) , the Compensatory Control Model considers effort a limited resource ( Hockey, 1997 ). Therefore, while effort allocation may effectively, but temporarily, maintain primary task performance, prolonged or particularly intense stress may deplete resources to the point where performance decrements are observed ( Hockey, 1997 ), as seen in the cognitive impairment resulting from military simulations. Additionally, Hockey (1997) suggested that so-called ‘latent decrements’ may occur outside of the primary task. For example, peripheral task performance may be impaired through attentional tunnelling ( Kohn, 1954 ; Staal, 2004 ) and the use of less effortful cognitive strategies, such as heuristics ( Gigerenzer and Selten, 2001 ), in non-primary tasks. In military settings, changes in mood ( Harris et al., 2005 ; Lieberman et al., 2005a ) or breakdowns in teamwork ( Driskell et al., 1999 ) may represent latent decrements resulting from the allocation of effort to maintain primary task performance.

According to the Compensatory Control Model, however, the allocation of effort is only one protection strategy that may be initiated by the supervisory controller. A second strategy, which avoids the aversive and costly mobilisation of effort, is to instead adjust performance targets ( Hockey, 1997 ). Although this passive coping strategy maintains energetic resources, task performance is impaired. Indeed, passive coping may, and often does, manifest as complete task disengagement ( Hockey, 1997 ). Given the often fixed and externally imposed nature of the performance targets in military combat settings, it is unclear whether passive coping strategies are possible for military personnel. Therefore, it is likely that in the stress inoculation training described above, and indeed during active combat, effort allocation may be the only protective strategy available to the supervisory controller. We encourage future research to consider whether, under the stress of combat, military personnel select to adjust their performance targets or instead sacrifice secondary tasks by allocating effort to primary targets.

Attentional Control Theory

Furthering the emphasis on the protective reallocation of attentional reserves is the Attentional Control Theory ( Eysenck et al., 2007 ). Attentional Control Theory extends on Eysenck and Calvo’s (1992) processing efficiency theory which considered the effects of stress and anxiety on cognition in terms of effectiveness and efficiency. It was argued that anxiety creates a state of self-preoccupation, drawing from limited attentional resources, which forces higher levels of effort to be allocated to maintain task performance. This increased allocation of effort may preserve performance quality (effectiveness), but it does so at the expense of decreased processing efficiency. While Attentional Control Theory maintains this distinction between processing efficiency and performance effectiveness, it describes several important extensions ( Eysenck et al., 2007 ). Specifically, Attentional Control Theory provides a more nuanced explanation of attentional demands, suggesting that decrements in processing efficiency are due to an anxiety-induced shift in attention away from the pursuit of goals and towards salient stimuli. Further, according to Attentional Control Theory, anxiety is most likely to affect processing efficiency in tasks requiring the executive functions of inhibition and shifting, since these functions ensure attention is directed toward task-relevant stimuli. As described above, these cognitive operations are particularly relevant to a military context.

Attentional Control Theory has been used to explain cognitive deficits resulting from anxiety and stress across a range of settings. For example, supporting the theory’s predictions, those with anxiety disorders display cognitive deficits that appear to relate to reduced attentional capacity ( Stefanopoulou et al., 2014 ). In a military context, Attentional Control Theory’s description of differential effects of anxiety across executive functions has been used to guide the development of cognitive training interventions that target those executive functions (inhibition and shifting) most threatened by anxiety ( Ben-Avraham et al., 2021 ). Attentional Control Theory can also be used to explain decrements in shooting performance and increases in effort in simulated military operations designed to provoke anxiety ( Nibbeling et al., 2014 ). Such findings highlight the potential applications and practical utility of the predictions of Attentional Control Theory for tactical athletes in military settings.

Summary and Critique

Common across all theories described above is the effortful allocation and reallocation of attention. This is thought to buffer the effects of stress on cognitive performance (task effectiveness), underpinning the conceptualisation of cognitive resilience. However, in monitoring cognitive resilience, measures should extend beyond task performance to also consider processing efficiency. This can be achieved by measuring subjective workload or perceived effort to determine the potential that effort allocation is protecting performance from the effects of stress. Uncovering regular, compensatory allocation of effort to sustain performance under stress may help to (1) detect potential threats to cognition before performance is degraded and (2) avoid cognitive and emotional burnout in military personnel.

Enhancing Cognitive Resilience

An understanding of the psychological stress experienced in military personnel and the impact of this stress on cognitive functioning offers avenues for enhancing cognitive resilience. However, the limits of cognitive resilience are bounded by two key considerations. First, stress is an inescapable and, therefore, inevitable part of life ( Lazarus and Folkman, 1984 ). Second, cognitive performance is rarely immune to the effects of stress ( Kavanagh, 2005 ). Despite these constraints, cognitive resilience can be enhanced (see below) and individual differences do exist, both in the psychological stress response ( Parkes, 1986 ) and cognitive resilience to stress ( Staal et al., 2008 ). Identifying the characteristics that explain these individual differences has clear applications in military settings, particularly in the selection of cognitively resilient military personnel and the determination of ‘cognitive readiness’ ( Grier, 2012 ). Indeed, the Transactional Theory and Maximal Adaptability Model have been used to develop comprehensive assessment tools, such as the Readiness Assessment and Monitoring System ( Cosenzo et al., 2007 ), that aim to predict cognitive performance under stress in military settings.

The capacity to train or enhance cognitive resilience also has obvious practical implications in military settings. A review by Kavanagh (2005) considered two points of moderation, where various factors can intervene in the effects of stress on performance. The first point of intervention (type 1 moderators), includes factors that moderate the stress that results from the presentation of a stressor ( Kavanagh, 2005 ). While Kavanagh (2005) was concerned with physiological responses to stressors, this first point of intervention also applies in psychological stress. Specifically, type 1 moderators can be seen as equivalent to the person-environment transaction described by Lazarus and Folkman (1984) . The second point of intervention (type 2 moderators) proposed in Kavanagh’s (2005) model, includes factors that moderate the effects of stress on performance. That is, once stress is experienced, what are the factors that moderate its effects on performance? Despite the focus on the physiological stress response, this two-point moderation model provides a useful heuristic for the consideration of interventions to enhance cognitive resilience in the military.

Several methods of enhancing cognitive resilience in military personnel were reviewed by Staal et al. (2008) , including the use of phased training techniques (see Keinan et al., 1990 for explanation). However, since that review, considerable gains have been made in the development of programs that aim to enhance cognitive resilience in military personnel. Mindfulness-based interventions, in particular, have proven to be especially effective in enhancing cognitive resilience. For example, Jha and colleagues ( Jha et al., 2010 , 2015 , 2017a , b ) report that while decays in working memory and attentional capacity occur in military personnel during the highly stressful pre-deployment phase, those engaging in mindfulness-based practice as part of an 8-week training program appear to be resilient to these effects, with some even displaying improvements in attention and working memory. This intervention can be seen as acting on both points of moderation described in Kavanagh’s (2005) model. Mindfulness interventions can act to reduce the psychological stress response ( Baer et al., 2012 ), thereby presenting as a type 1 moderator. In fact, Johnson et al. (2014) reported decreased psychological stress responses to stress-inoculation training scenarios in military personnel after an 8-week mindfulness intervention. As a type 2 moderator, mindfulness interventions have been shown to improve performance in a range of cognitive operations ( Jha et al., 2007 ; Zeidan et al., 2010 ) and may, therefore, protect or enhance cognitive reserves that are threatened by stress. Physical training, particularly in tasks requiring the regulation of effort and pacing (i.e., endurance) has also shown promise as a way of building cognitive resilience to the effects of mental fatigue ( Filipas et al., 2020 ).

Similarly, Virtual Reality (VR) technology has been used in military training environments to train cognitive resilience to stress. Most commonly, VR technology has been paired with cognitive-behavioural therapy as a tool to gradually and safely expose military personnel suffering from PTSD to anxiety provoking stimuli so that therapeutic cognitive reorientation can take place ( Rizzo et al., 2011 ; Seitz et al., 2014 ). However, VR technology has also been ‘retooled’ for use during pre-deployment training. Adopting the principles of stress inoculation training programs outlined above (see also Meichenbaum, 1977 ), VR technology has been used to present stress-inducing virtual scenarios to encourage adaptive responses in military personnel ( Pallavicini et al., 2016 ; Binsch et al., 2021 ). For example, in the ‘Stress Resilience in Virtual Environments’ (STRIVE) project, virtual environments depicting combat scenarios in Iraq and Afghanistan are used to facilitate adaptive coping and train cognitive appraisal processes to be oriented toward challenge, rather than threat, appraisals ( Wiederhold and Wiederhold, 2008 ; Buckwalter et al., 2012 ). This technology has also allowed for more realistic and therefore, ecologically valid tools for assessing cognitive operations ( Parsons and Rizzo, 2008 ) and has been shown to enhance military operational performance ( Wiederhold and Wiederhold, 2008 ). Therefore, by acting on stress appraisal and reducing the impact of stress on performance, VR-based stress inoculation training can influence cognitive resilience at both points of moderation proposed by Kavanagh (2005) . With such wide-ranging applications, VR presents as an exciting opportunity to enhance the psychological and cognitive readiness of military personnel. However, while physiological stress markers have been routinely monitored during VR-based stress inoculation training ( Rizzo et al., 2013 ), more work is needed to assess the impact on perceived stress during the inoculation training and in real-world scenarios.

It has recently been suggested that a return to past approaches is needed to combat the risk-averse nature of current military training protocols ( Nindl et al., 2018 ). While an overly risk-averse direction may ultimately reduce the combat readiness of military personnel, continual refinement of training protocols is necessary to acknowledge the changing nature of the stressors faced by military personnel and the many advancements made in deployment preparation. Promising areas of research into the psychological preparation of military personnel for modern combat are wide-ranging, certainly extending beyond the examples provided here. Given its importance in military operations, further exploration of methods to promote cognitive resilience, grounded in the theoretical models outlined above, is encouraged. In the modern context, online and app-based interventions may also be adopted to support the monitoring of stressful stimuli, changes to stress appraisal, and also optimal coping strategies, with a view to shifting the scientific support closer towards the moments and locations where the stress is experienced.

The stressors faced by military personnel are diverse, ranging from boredom to the threat of injury and death. Advancements in technology and the nature of war mean that these stressors are also constantly evolving. It is, therefore, difficult to profile the stress experienced by military personnel in modern military operations and to determine the impact of this stress on cognitive performance. However, despite the diversity and evolution of these stressors, this review highlights that existing theoretical models remain relevant to understanding cognitive resilience in military settings. The Transactional Theory emphasises the importance of appraisal and coping for the subjective experience of stress. Attentional Control Theory and the compensatory control and maximal adaptability models explain how stress may impact on cognitive functioning by threatening limited reserves of effort and attention. Importantly, these existing theoretical perspectives emphasise that stress-induced changes in cognition may not initially be detected through decrements in performance, but instead through decreased efficiency. Further incorporation of these models into military settings will provide a platform upon which to advance our understanding of cognitive resilience to psychological stress. Several areas for future investigation have been identified throughout this review. Taken together, these recommendations identify that while the stressors faced by military personnel have been well-documented, more work is needed to determine how these stressors are appraised. This will better inform our understanding of the lived, subjective experience of stress in military personnel. It is only then that we can begin to appreciate the complexity of cognitive resilience in military settings and better prepare military personnel for the realities of modern warfare.

Author Contributions

AF led in the planning, research, and drafting of this paper. RK liaised with the key stakeholders, agreed the necessity of the review, and reviewed and edited the drafts during the development of the paper. RK and AF worked together to plan the paper at the design stage. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

This research was funded by a grant from Defence Science Technology, Australia, as part of the ‘Human Performance Research Network’ (‘HPRnet’ – Award ID: 2016000167), in collaboration with Australian Army. The funding source was not involved in the preparation of the article for publication.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• Armour C., Ross J. (2017). The health and well-being of military drone operators and intelligence analysts: a systematic review . Mil. Psychol. 29 , 83–98. doi: 10.1037/mil0000149 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Arnold S. E., Louneva N., Cao K., Wang L.-S., Han L.-Y., Wolk D. A., et al.. (2013). Cellular, synaptic, and biochemical features of resilient cognition in Alzheimer's disease . Neurobiol. Aging 34 , 157–168. doi: 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2012.03.004, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Baer R. A., Carmody J., Hunsinger M. (2012). Weekly change in mindfulness and perceived stress in a mindfulness-based stress reduction program . J. Clin. Psychol. 68 , 755–765. doi: 10.1002/jclp.21865, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bartone P. T. (2006). Resilience under military operational stress: can leaders influence hardiness? Mil. Psychol. 18 , S131–S148. doi: 10.1207/s15327876mp1803s_10 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bartone P. T., Adler A. B., Vaitkus M. A. (1998). Dimensions of psychological stress in peacekeeping operations . Mil. Med. 163 , 587–593. doi: 10.1093/milmed/163.9.587, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Baum A., Fleming R., Singer J. E. (1983). Coping with victimization by technological disaster . J. Soc. Issues 39 , 117–138. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1983.tb00144.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ben-Avraham R., Afek A., Berezin Cohen N., Davidov A., Van Vleet T., Jordan J., et al.. (2021). Feasibility and preliminary effectiveness of mobile cognitive control training during basic combat training in the military . Mil. Psychol. 1–13. doi: 10.1080/08995605.2021.1969162 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bequette B., Norton A., Jones E., Stirling L. (2020). Physical and cognitive load effects due to a powered lower-body exoskeleton . Hum. Factors 62 , 411–423. doi: 10.1177/0018720820907450, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Biggs A. T., Cain M. S., Mitroff S. R. (2015). Cognitive training can reduce civilian casualties in a simulated shooting environment . Psychol. Sci. 26 , 1164–1176. doi: 10.1177/0956797615579274, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Billings A. C., Moos R. H. (1982). Psychosocial theory and research on depression: an integrative framework and review . Clin. Psychol. Rev. 2 , 213–237. doi: 10.1016/0272-7358(82)90013-7 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Binsch O., Bottenheft C., Landman A., Roijendijk L., Vermetten E. H. G. J. M. (2021). Testing the applicability of a virtual reality simulation platform for stress training of first responders . Mil. Psychol. 33 , 182–196. doi: 10.1080/08995605.2021.1897494 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Blacker K. J., Hamilton J., Roush G., Pettijohn K. A., Biggs A. T. (2019). Cognitive training for military application: a review of the literature and practical guide . J. Cogn. Enhanc. 3 , 30–51. doi: 10.1007/s41465-018-0076-1 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bone E., Bolkcom C. (2003). Unmanned Aerial V ehicles: Background and Issues for Congress. Library Of Congress Washington Dc Congressional Research service.
• Bray R. M., Hourani L. L., Olmsted K. L., Witt M., Brown J. M., Pemberton M. R., et al.. (2009). 2005 Department of defense survey of health related behaviors among active duty military personnel: A Component of the Defense Lifestyle Assessment Program (RTI/7841/106-FR). Retrieved from Research Triangle Park, NC.
• Buckwalter J. G., Rizzo A., John B., Newman B., Williams J., Parsons T. (2012). Strive: Stress resilience in virtual environments. Paper presented at the Virtual Reality Short Papers and Posters (VRW), 2012 IEEE, Orange County, CA, USA. [ PubMed ]
• Casey G. W., Jr. (2011). Comprehensive soldier fitness: a vision for psychological resilience in the US Army . Am. Psychol. 66 , 1–3. doi: 10.1037/a0021930, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chapa J. O. (2017). Remotely piloted aircraft, risk, and killing as sacrifice: the cost of remote warfare . J. Military Ethics 16 , 256–271. doi: 10.1080/15027570.2018.1440501 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chappelle W. L., McDonald K. D., Prince L., Goodman T., Ray-Sannerud B. N., Thompson W. (2014). Symptoms of psychological distress and post-traumatic stress disorder in United States air Force “drone” operators . Mil. Med. 179 ( Suppl. 8 ), 63–70. doi: 10.7205/MILMED-D-13-00501, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cohen S., Kamarck T., Mermelstein R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress . J. Health Soc. Behav. 24 , 385–396. doi: 10.2307/2136404 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cohn A., Hodson S., Crane M. (2010). Resilience training in the Australian defence force. InPsych: the Bulletin of the Australian Psychological Society. Available at: https://psychology.org.au/publications/inpsych/2010/april/cohn [ Google Scholar ]
• Cosenzo K. A., Fatkin L. T., Patton D. J. (2007). Ready or not: enhancing operational effectiveness through use of readiness measures . Aviat. Space Environ. Med. 78 , B96–B106. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dekel R., Solomon Z., Ginzburg K., Neria Y. (2003). Combat exposure, wartime performance, and long-term adjustment among combatants . Mil. Psychol. 15 , 117–131. doi: 10.1207/S15327876MP1502_2 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Doran A. P., Hoyt G., Morgan C. A. (2012). “ Survival, evasion, resistance, and escape (sere) training ,” in Military Psychology: Clinical and Operational Applications. eds. Kennedy C. H., Zillmer E. E. (New York, NY: The Guilford Press; ), 306. [ Google Scholar ]
• Driskell J. E., Salas E., Johnston J. (1999). Does stress lead to a loss of team perspective? Group Dyn. Theory Res. Pract. 3 , 291–302. doi: 10.1037/1089-2699.3.4.291 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Driskell J. E., Salas E., Johnston J. H. (2006). Decision Making and Performance Under Stress Military Life: The Psychology of Serving in Peace and Combat: Military Performance. Vol. 1. Westport, CT: Praeger Security International, 128–154. [ Google Scholar ]
• Eysenck M. W., Calvo M. G. (1992). Anxiety and performance: the processing efficiency theory . Cognit. Emot. 6 , 409–434. doi: 10.1080/02699939208409696 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Eysenck M. W., Derakshan N., Santos R., Calvo M. G. (2007). Anxiety and cognitive performance: attentional control theory . Emotion 7 , 336–353. doi: 10.1037/1528-3542.7.2.336 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fergus S., Zimmerman M. A. (2005). Adolescent resilience: a framework for understanding healthy development in the face of risk . Annu. Rev. Public Health 26 , 399–419. doi: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.26.021304.144357, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Filipas L., Martin K., Northey J. M., La Torre A., Keegan R., Rattray B. (2020). A 4-week endurance training program improves tolerance to mental exertion in untrained individuals . J. Sci. Med. Sport 23 , 1215–1219. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2020.04.020, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fisherl C. D. (1993). Boredom at work: a neglected concept . Hum. Relat. 46 , 395–417. doi: 10.1177/001872679304600305 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fitzsimmons S., Sangha K. (2010). Killing in high definition . Technology 12 , 289–292. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fletcher D., Sarkar M. (2012). A grounded theory of psychological resilience in Olympic champions . Psychol. Sport Exerc. 13 , 669–678. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2012.04.007 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Folkman S. (1984). Personal control and stress and coping processes: a theoretical analysis . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 46 , 839–852. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.46.4.839, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Folkman S. (1997). Positive psychological states and coping with severe stress . Soc. Sci. Med. 45 , 1207–1221. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(97)00040-3 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Folkman S. (2008). The case for positive emotions in the stress process . Anxiety Stress Coping 21 , 3–14. doi: 10.1080/10615800701740457 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Folkman S., Lazarus R. S., Dunkel-Schetter C., DeLongis A., Gruen R. J. (1986a). Dynamics of a stressful encounter: cognitive appraisal, coping, and encounter outcomes . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 50 , 992–1003. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.50.5.992, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Folkman S., Lazarus R. S., Gruen R. J., DeLongis A. (1986b). Appraisal, coping, health status, and psychological symptoms . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 50 , 571–579. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.50.3.571 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Folkman S., Moskowitz J. T. (2000). Positive affect and the other side of coping . Am. Psychol. 55 , 647–654. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.6.647, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gigerenzer G., Selten R. (eds.) (2001). “ Rethinking rationality ,” in Bounded Rationality: The Adaptive Toolbox. Vol. 1. London, England: MIT Press, 12. [ Google Scholar ]
• Grier R. A. (2012). Military cognitive readiness at the operational and strategic levels: a theoretical model for measurement development . J. Cogn. Engin. Dec. Making 6 , 358–392. doi: 10.1177/1555343412444606 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Grinker R. R., Spiegel J. P. (1945). Men Under Stress. Philadelphia, PA: Blakiston. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hammermeister J., Pickering M., Lennox A. (2012). Military applications of performance psychology methods and techniques: an overview of practice and research . J. Perform. Psychol. 3 , 1–12. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hancock P. A., Warm J. S. (1989). A dynamic model of stress and sustained attention . Hum. Factors 31 , 519–537. doi: 10.1177/001872088903100503, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hansen A. L., Johnsen B. H., Thayer J. F. (2009). Relationship between heart rate variability and cognitive function during threat of shock . Anx. Stress Coping 22 , 77–89. doi: 10.1080/10615800802272251, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Harris W. C., Hancock P., Harris S. C. (2005). Information processing changes following extended stress . Mil. Psychol. 17 , 115–128. doi: 10.1207/s15327876mp1702_4 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hawthorne G., Korn S., Creamer M. (2014). Australian Peacekeepers: Long-Term Mental Health Status, Health Service Use, and Quality of Life - Technical Report. Australia: Department of Psychiatry, University of Melbourne. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hayes J. P., VanElzakker M. B., Shin L. M. (2012). Emotion and cognition interactions in PTSD: a review of neurocognitive and neuroimaging studies . Front. Integr. Neurosci. 6 :89. doi: 10.3389/fnint.2012.00089 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hellhammer J., Schubert M. (2012). The physiological response to Trier social stress test relates to subjective measures of stress during but not before or after the test . Psychoneuroendocrinology 37 , 119–124. doi: 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2011.05.012 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hockey G. R. J. (1997). Compensatory control in the regulation of human performance under stress and high workload: a cognitive-energetical framework . Biol. Psychol. 45 , 73–93. doi: 10.1016/S0301-0511(96)05223-4, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hoge C. W., Castro C. A., Messer S. C., McGurk D., Cotting D. I., Koffman R. L. (2004). Combat duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, mental health problems, and barriers to care . N. Engl. J. Med. 351 , 13–22. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa040603, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jex S. M. (1998). Stress and Job Performance: Theory, Research, and Implications for Managerial Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jha A. P., Krompinger J., Baime M. J. (2007). Mindfulness training modifies subsystems of attention . Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 7 , 109–119. doi: 10.3758/CABN.7.2.109, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jha A. P., Morrison A. B., Dainer-Best J., Parker S., Rostrup N., Stanley E. A. (2015). Minds “At attention”: mindfulness training curbs attentional lapses in military cohorts . PLoS One 10 :e0116889. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0116889, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jha A. P., Morrison A. B., Parker S. C., Stanley E. A. (2017a). Practice is protective: mindfulness training promotes cognitive resilience in high-stress cohorts . Mindfulness 8 , 46–58. doi: 10.1007/s12671-015-0465-9 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jha A. P., Stanley E. A., Kiyonaga A., Wong L., Gelfand L. (2010). Examining the protective effects of mindfulness training on working memory capacity and affective experience . Emotion 10 , 54–64. doi: 10.1037/a0018438, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jha A. P., Witkin J. E., Morrison A. B., Rostrup N., Stanley E. (2017b). Short-form mindfulness training protects against working memory degradation over high-demand intervals . J. Cogni. Enhanc. 1 , 154–171. doi: 10.1007/s41465-017-0035-2 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Johnson D. C., Thom N. J., Stanley E. A., Haase L., Simmons A. N., Shih P. A. B., et al.. (2014). Modifying resilience mechanisms in at-risk individuals: a controlled study of mindfulness training in marines preparing for deployment . Am. J. Psychiatr. 171 , 844–853. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2014.13040502, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kahneman D. (1973). Attention and Effort. Vol. 1063. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kavanagh J.. (2005). Stress and Performance A Review of the Literature and its Applicability to the Military. Available at: https://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR192.html (Accessed June 20, 2020).
• Keinan G., Friedland N., Sarig-Naor V. (1990). Training for task performance under stress: the effectiveness of phased training methods . J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 20 , 1514–1529. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1990.tb01490.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kerick S. E., Allender L. E. (2004). “Effects of cognitive workload on decision accuracy, shooting performance, and cortical activity of soldiers transformational science and Technology for the Current and Future Force.” in Proceedings of the 24th US Army Science Conference ; November 29–December 2, 2006, 359-362.
• Kohn H. (1954). The effect of variations of intensity of experimentally induced stress situations upon certain aspects of perception and performance . J. Genet. Psychol. 85 , 289–304. doi: 10.1080/00221325.1954.10532884, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kreuz M. E., Rose R. M., Jennings C. (1972). Suppression of plasma testosterone levels and psychological stress: a longitudinal study of young men in officer candidate school . Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 26 , 479–482. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.1972.01750230089017, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lazarus R. S. (2000). “ Evolution of a model of stress, coping, and discrete emotions ,” in Handbook of Stress, Coping, and Health: Implications for Nursing Research, Theory, and Practice. 2nd Edn . ed. Rice V. H. (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd; ), 195–222. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lazarus R. S. (2007). “ Stress and emotion: A new synthesis ,” in The Praeger Handbook on Stress and Coping. Vol 1. eds. Monat A., Lazarus R. S., Reevy G. (Westport, Connecticut: Praeger; ), 33–51. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lazarus R. S., Folkman S. (1984). Stress, Appraisal, and Coping. New York, NY: Springer. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lazarus R. S., Folkman S. (1987). Transactional theory and research on emotions and coping . Eur. J. Personal. 1 , 141–169. doi: 10.1002/per.2410010304 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lieberman H. R., Bathalon G. P., Falco C. M., Kramer F. M., Morgan C. A., Niro P. (2005a). Severe decrements in cognition function and mood induced by sleep loss, heat, dehydration, and undernutrition during simulated combat . Biol. Psychiatry 57 , 422–429. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2004.11.014, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lieberman H. R., Bathalon G. P., Falco C. M., Morgan C. A., Niro P. J., Tharion W. J. (2005b). The fog of war: decrements in cognitive performance and mood associated with combat-like stress . Aviat. Space Environ. Med. 76 , C7–C14. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lieberman H. R., Farina E. K., Caldwell J., Williams K. W., Thompson L. A., Niro P. J., et al.. (2016). Cognitive function, stress hormones, heart rate and nutritional status during simulated captivity in military survival training . Physiol. Behav. 165 , 86–97. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2016.06.037, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lieberman H. R., Tharion W. J., Shukitt-Hale B., Speckman K. L., Tulley R. (2002). Effects of caffeine, sleep loss, and stress on cognitive performance and mood during US navy SEAL training . Psychopharmacology 164 , 250–261. doi: 10.1007/s00213-002-1217-9, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lukey B. J., Tepe V. (eds.) (2008). Biobehavioral Resilience to Stress. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Luthar S. S., Cicchetti D. (2000). The construct of resilience: implications for interventions and social policies . Dev. Psychopathol. 12 , 857–885. doi: 10.1017/S0954579400004156, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Martin K., McLeod E., Périard J., Rattray B., Keegan R., Pyne D. B. (2019). The impact of environmental stress on cognitive performance: a systematic review . Hum. Factors 61 , 1205–1246. doi: 10.1177/0018720819839817, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Martin K., Périard J., Rattray B., Pyne D. B. (2020). Physiological factors which influence cognitive performance in military personnel . Hum. Factors 62 , 93–123. doi: 10.1177/0018720819841757, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Martin K., Thompson K. G., Keegan R., Ball N., Rattray B. (2015). Mental fatigue does not affect maximal anaerobic exercise performance . Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 115 , 715–725. doi: 10.1007/s00421-014-3052-1 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mastroianni G. R., Mabry T. R., Benedek D. M., Ursano R. J. (2008). “ The stresses of modern war ,” in Biobehavioral Resilience to Stress. eds. Lukey B. J., Tepe V. (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; ), 50–62. [ Google Scholar ]
• Meichenbaum D. (1977). Cognitive-Behaviour Modification: An Integrative Approach. New York: Springer. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mikulincer M., Florian V. (1995). Appraisal of and coping with a real-life stressful situation: the contribution of attachment styles . Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 21 , 406–414. doi: 10.1177/0146167295214011 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Morgan C. A., Doran A., Steffian G., Hazlett G., Southwick S. M. (2006). Stress-induced deficits in working memory and visuo-constructive abilities in special operations soldiers . Biol. Psychiatry 60 , 722–729. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2006.04.021, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Morgan C. A., Rasmusson A. M., Wang S., Hoyt G., Hauger R. L., Hazlett G. (2002). Neuropeptide-Y, cortisol, and subjective distress in humans exposed to acute stress: replication and extension of previous report . Biol. Psychiatry 52 , 136–142. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3223(02)01319-7, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Morgan C. A., Russell B., McNeil J., Maxwell J., Snyder P. J., Southwick S. M., et al.. (2011). Baseline burnout symptoms predict Visuospatial executive function During survival school training in special operations military personnel . J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc. 17 , 494–501. doi: 10.1017/S1355617711000221, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Morgan C. A., Wang S., Mason J., Southwick S. M., Fox P., Hazlett G., et al.. (2000). Hormone profiles in humans experiencing military survival training . Biol. Psychiatry 47 , 891–901. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3223(99)00307-8, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mujica-Parodi L. R., Renelique R., Taylor M. K. (2008). Higher body fat percentage is associated with increased cortisol reactivity and impaired cognitive resilience in response to acute emotional stress . Int. J. Obes. 33 , 157–165. doi: 10.1038/ijo.2008.218, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Negash S., Xie S., Davatzikos C., Clark C. M., Trojanowski J. Q., Shaw L. M., et al.. (2013). Cognitive and functional resilience despite molecular evidence of Alzheimer’s disease pathology . Alzheimers Dement. 9 , e89–e95. doi: 10.1016/j.jalz.2012.01.009, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nibbeling N., Oudejans R. R., Ubink E. M., Daanen H. A. (2014). The effects of anxiety and exercise-induced fatigue on shooting accuracy and cognitive performance in infantry soldiers . Ergonomics 57 , 1366–1379. doi: 10.1080/00140139.2014.924572, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nicholls A. R., Levy A. R., Carson F., Thompson M. A., Perry J. L. (2016). The applicability of self-regulation theories in sport: goal adjustment capacities, stress appraisals, coping, and well-being among athletes . Psychol. Sport Exerc. 27 , 47–55. doi: 10.1016/j.psychsport.2016.07.011 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nicholls A. R., Perry J. L., Calmeiro L. (2014). Precompetitive achievement goals, stress appraisals, emotions, and coping among athletes . J. Sport Exerc. Psychol. 36 , 433–445. doi: 10.1123/jsep.2013-0266, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nindl B. C., Billing D. C., Drain J. R., Beckner M. E., Greeves J., Groeller H., et al.. (2018). Perspectives on resilience on military readiness and preparedness: report of an international military physiology roundtable . J. Sci. Med. 21 , 1116–1124. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2018.05.005, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Orantes-Gonzalez E., Heredia-Jimenez J. (2021). Obstacle course soldiers’ reaction and perception time: combat equipment load effects . J. Psychol. Afr. 31 , 434–438. doi: 10.1080/14330237.2021.1952731 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pallavicini F., Argenton L., Toniazzi N., Aceti L., Mantovani F. (2016). Virtual reality applications for stress management training in the military . Aerospace Med. Human Perfor. 87 , 1021–1030. doi: 10.3357/AMHP.4596.2016, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Parkes K. R. (1986). Coping in stressful episodes: The role of individual differences, environmental factors, and situational characteristics . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 51 , 1277–1292. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1277, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Parsons T. D., Rizzo A. A. (2008). Initial validation of a virtual environment for assessment of memory functioning: virtual reality cognitive performance assessment test . Cyberpsychol. Behav. 11 , 17–25. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2007.9934, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pflanz S. (2001). Occupational stress and psychiatric illness in the military: investigation of the relationship between occupational stress and mental illness among military mental health patients . Mil. Med. 166 , 457–462. doi: 10.1093/milmed/166.6.457, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pflanz S. E., Ogle A. D. (2006). Job stress, depression, work performance, and perceptions of supervisors in military personnel . Mil. Med. 171 , 861–865. doi: 10.7205/MILMED.171.9.861, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pflanz S., Sonnek S. (2002). Work stress in the military: prevalence, causes, and relationship to emotional health . Mil. Med. 167 , 877–882. doi: 10.1093/milmed/167.11.877, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rabheru K., Cassidy K.-L., Cassidy B., Conn D. (2021). “ Mental Health, Cognitive Resilience, and Vitality ,” in Promoting the Health of Older Adults: The Canadian Experience. eds. Rootman I., Edwards P., Levasseur M., Grunberg F. (Canada: Canadian Scholars’ Press; ), 323. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rezapour T., Assari S., Kirlic N., Vassileva J., Ekhtiari H. (2021). Enhancing Cognitive Resilience in Adolescence and Young Adults: A Multidimensional Approach Family Resilience and Recovery from Opioids and Other Addictions. Cham: Springer, 45–64. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rizzo A., John B., Newman B., Williams J., Hartholt A., Lethin C., et al.. (2013). Virtual reality as a tool for delivering PTSD exposure therapy and stress resilience training . Mil. Behav. Health 1 , 52–58. doi: 10.1080/21635781.2012.721064 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rizzo A., Parsons T. D., Lange B., Kenny P., Buckwalter J. G., Rothbaum B., et al.. (2011). Virtual reality goes to war: a brief review of the future of military behavioral healthcare . J. Clin. Psychol. Med. Settings 18 , 176–187. doi: 10.1007/s10880-011-9247-2, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Roesch S. C., Weiner B., Vaughn A. A. (2002). Cognitive approaches to stress and coping . Curr. Opin. Psychiatry 15 , 627–632. doi: 10.1097/00001504-200211000-00012 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rossetto K. R. (2015). Developing conceptual definitions and theoretical models of coping in military families during deployment . J. Fam. Commun. 15 , 249–268. doi: 10.1080/15267431.2015.1043737 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Roth S., Cohen L. J. (1986). Approach, avoidance, and coping with stress . Am. Psychol. 41 , 813–819. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.41.7.813 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rutter M. (1987). Psychosocial resilience and protective mechanisms . Am. J. Orthopsychiatry 57 , 316–331. doi: 10.1111/j.1939-0025.1987.tb03541.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sandi C. (2013). Stress and cognition . Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Cogn. Sci. 4 , 245–261. doi: 10.1002/wcs.1222 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Seitz C. A., Poyrazli S., Harrisson M. A., Flickinger T., Turkson M. (2014). Virtual reality exposure therapy for military veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder: a systematic review . New Sch. Psychol. Bull. 11 , 15–29. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sharma V. M., Sridharan K., Selvamurthy W., Mukherjee A. K., Kumaria M. M. L., Upadhyay T. N., et al.. (1994). Personality traits and performance of military parachutist trainees . Ergonomics 37 , 1145–1155. doi: 10.1080/00140139408964894, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shields M. R., Brooks M. A., Koltyn K. F., Kim J.-S., Cook D. B. (2017). Cognitive resilience and psychological responses across a collegiate rowing season . Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 49 , 2276–2285. doi: 10.1249/mss.0000000000001363, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Skinner E. A., Edge K., Altman J., Sherwood H. (2003). Searching for the structure of coping: a review and critique of category systems for classifying ways of coping . Psychol. Bull. 129 , 216–269. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.129.2.216, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Spivak T., Hollands J. G., Kramkowski E. W. (2019). “Cognitive load and situation awareness for soldiers: using an auditory detection response task.” in Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting , October 28, 2019. Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications. [ PubMed ]
• Staal M. A. (2004). Stress, Cognition, and Human Performance: A Literature Review and Conceptual Framework. Available at: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20060017835 (Accessed June 20, 2020).
• Staal M. A., Bolton A., Yaroush R., Bourne L. (2008). “ Cognitive performance and resilience to stress ,” in Biobehavioral Resilience to Stress. eds. Lukey B. J., Tepe V. (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; ), 259–299. [ Google Scholar ]
• Stefanopoulou E., Hirsch C. R., Hayes S., Adlam A., Coker S. (2014). Are attentional control resources reduced by worry in generalized anxiety disorder? J. Abnorm. Psychol. 123 , 330–335. doi: 10.1037/a0036343, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Taverniers J., Smeets T., Lo Bue S., Syroit J., Van Ruysseveldt J., Pattyn N., et al.. (2011). Visuo-spatial path learning, stress, and cortisol secretion following military cadets’ first parachute jump: the effect of increasing task complexity . Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 11 , 332–343. doi: 10.3758/s13415-011-0043-0, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Taverniers J., Taylor M. K., Smeets T. (2013). Delayed memory effects after intense stress in special forces candidates: exploring path processes between cortisol secretion and memory recall. Stress: The international journal on the biology of . Stress 16 , 311–320. doi: 10.3109/10253890.2012.721824, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Taverniers J., Van Ruysseveldt J., Smeets T., von Grumbkow J. (2010). High-intensity stress elicits robust cortisol increases, and impairs working memory and visuo-spatial declarative memory in special forces candidates: a field experiment . Stress 13 , 324–334. doi: 10.3109/10253891003642394, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Taylor A. H., Schatz S. (2011). “Measuring the Effectiveness of Stress Prevention Programs in Military Personnel.” in Paper presented at the International Conference on Foundations of Augmented Cognition , July 9, 2011. Berlin, Heidelberg.
• Vrijkotte S., Roelands B., Meeusen R., Pattyn N. (2016). Sustained military operations and cognitive performance . Aerospace Med. Human Perform. 87 , 718–727. doi: 10.3357/AMHP.4468.2016, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wiederhold B. K., Wiederhold M. D. (2008). Virtual reality for posttraumatic stress disorder and stress inoculation training . J. Cyber Ther. Rehabil. 1 , 23–35. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yaffe K., Fiocco A. J., Lindquist K., Vittinghoff E., Simonsick E. M., Newman A. B., et al.. (2009). Predictors of maintaining cognitive function in older adults: the health ABC study . Neurology 72 , 2029–2035. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e3181a92c36, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zeidan F., Johnson S. K., Diamond B. J., David Z., Goolkasian P. (2010). Mindfulness meditation improves cognition: evidence of brief mental training . Conscious. Cogn. 19 , 597–605. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2010.03.014, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

• Subject List
• Take a Tour
• For Authors
• Subscriber Services
• Publications
• African American Studies
• African Studies
• American Literature
• Anthropology
• Architecture Planning and Preservation
• Art History
• Atlantic History
• Biblical Studies
• British and Irish Literature
• Childhood Studies
• Chinese Studies
• Cinema and Media Studies
• Communication
• Criminology
• Environmental Science
• Evolutionary Biology
• International Law
• International Relations
• Islamic Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Latino Studies
• Linguistics
• Literary and Critical Theory
• Medieval Studies
• Military History
• Political Science
• Public Health
• Renaissance and Reformation
• Social Work
• Urban Studies
• Victorian Literature
• Browse All Subjects

How to Subscribe

• Free Trials

In This Article Expand or collapse the "in this article" section Military Psychology

Introduction, general overviews.

• Research Journals
• Clinical Applications and Military Mental Health
• Preventive Approaches and Resilience Building
• Veteran Issues
• Military Leadership
• Future Directions
• Ethical Issues

Related Articles Expand or collapse the "related articles" section about

About related articles close popup.

Lorem Ipsum Sit Dolor Amet

Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Aliquam ligula odio, euismod ut aliquam et, vestibulum nec risus. Nulla viverra, arcu et iaculis consequat, justo diam ornare tellus, semper ultrices tellus nunc eu tellus.

• Ecological Psychology
• Forensic Psychology
• Health Psychology
• Psychology and Law

Other Subject Areas

Forthcoming articles expand or collapse the "forthcoming articles" section.

• Data Visualization
• Executive Functions in Childhood
• Remote Work
• Find more forthcoming articles...
• Export Citations
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Military Psychology by Updesh Kumar , Swati Mukherjee LAST REVIEWED: 29 November 2022 LAST MODIFIED: 29 November 2022 DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199828340-0298

Military psychology is a specialized field of applied psychology that defines itself not through its subject content or methodological concerns, rather through its goal of optimally fulfilling the requirements of its end user, the armed forces. It is a distinctive domain where varied sub-disciplines of psychology converge in pursuance of ensuring efficiency, effectiveness, and sustained performance by the armed forces in specific contexts and under exceptional circumstances. It is focused on building, enhancing, and optimizing the human capital. Though psychological principles have always been used by humankind in warfare, military psychology as a modern discipline found expression as recently as the First World War. Remarkably, the relationship between military and psychology has been almost symbiotic, the two growing in tandem and benefitting mutually. While the German military was a pioneer in utilizing the expertise of psychologists in the war effort, using aptitude testing for recruitment into different occupation, during the First World War, utilization of psychological expertise by Britain and France remained limited. After entering the First World War in 1917 the United States effectively utilized psychological knowledge in recruitment, classification, and training. Large-scale use of psychology gave impetus to the growth of psychology and resulted in the establishment of the Division of Psychology in the office of the Surgeon General of the US Army in 1917. Psychology in the military grew exponentially during the years of the Second World War. Psychologists were recruited in various branches of the armed forces, overseeing personnel selection, health care, training, proficiency measurement, and leadership. The American Psychological Association recognized the contributions of psychology to the war effort by including the Division of Military Psychology (Division 19) as a formal sub-division in 1945. The psychologists gained a formal entry in the British civil services during the postwar period. As the world settled into an uneasy peace and a Cold War, military psychology found ever newer avenues. While ensuring person-job fit remained a prime domain, clinical intervention, human factor engineering, leadership, propaganda, and other social processes provided military psychologists with new research opportunities. In the current era of techno-centric warfare, military psychology is finding applications in varied domains of optimizing man-machine interface for enhanced operational efficiency, enhancing cognitive capabilities through artificial intelligence supported decision networks and an improved understanding of personality processes. Also, as the changing nature of warfare necessitates that the nations find alternative ways of securing their interests beyond war, military psychology today stands at a juncture facing not only methodological challenges, but also unprecedented challenges of an ethical nature.

Military psychology is a broad and complex domain. There are a number of handbooks and general overviews available that introduce the learner to the applications of psychological principles in the military. Gal and Mangelsdorf 1991 and Cronin 1998 , though a bit dated, provide a comprehensive introduction almost like a textbook. In a similar vein, Driskell and Olmstead 1989 elaborates upon the symbiotic relationship between military and the psychological science born out of the expediencies of the First World War and discusses three core areas of psychological research and applications in the military, namely, selection and classification, training, and human factors. A relatively contemporary overview of applications of psychology in the military is given by Laurence and Matthews 2012 , which describes various subfields and specialties within military psychology. Expanding beyond basic operational processes like selection and training, terror and counterterror measures, Kennedy and Zillmer 2022 provides a focused discussion on stress, trauma, injury, and other clinical issues and incorporates updated information on military mental health services and evidence-based treatments. Another recent review of history and development of military psychology is provided by Mastroianni 2022 that expounds upon the vibrancy of the discipline focusing upon a core set of stable areas of study, dynamically adapting to ever newer applications. Hacker Hughes, et al. 2019 traces the history of military psychology in the United Kingdom and reflects upon the contemporary issues of significance. Also includes relevant international illustrations. Bowles and Bartone 2017 reflects upon clinical and organizational practice in the military, extensively delves upon regular topics like role of psychology in selection and placement, well-being, and mental health. Also includes specialized areas like assault and sexual harassment in the military, use of virtual reality in military mental health programs. Kumar 2019 provides a wide-ranging overview of the discipline and also includes contributions from across the globe. Matthews and Laurence 2011 most elaborately includes expansive discussions on various aspects of research and practice in four volumes of military psychology.

Bowles, Stephen, and Paul T. Bartone, eds. 2017. Handbook of military psychology: Clinical and organizational practice . Cham, Switzerland: Springer International.

A compendium of articles on challenges faced by contemporary military psychologists at individual, social, and organizational levels in ensuring mental health and operational efficiency of the armed forces. Spread across thirty-six chapters divided into seven parts. Encompasses topics like soldier well-being and resilience, selection and assessment of service personnel, and pre- and post-deployment issues. Also reflects upon specialized domains like aeromedical psychology, virtual reality applications, and opportunities and challenges faced by military psychology students. Dedicates an entire section on international perspectives with contributions from India, China, Australia, Sweden, Singapore, and many more.

Cronin, Christopher, ed. 1998. Military psychology: An introduction . Needham Height, MA: Simon & Schuster.

An introductory text tailored to the needs of an initial learner, highlights the areas that differentiate applications of psychology in the military from psychological practice in general. Includes chapters covering eight major domains, namely, selection, classification and assignment, human factors, environmental factors, leadership, individual and group behavior, training and education, manpower management decision making support, and clinical and consultative/organizational psychology.

Driskell, James E., and Beckett Olmstead. 1989. Psychology and the military: Research applications and trends. American Psychologist 44.1: 43–54.

DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.44.1.43

A definitive text that traces the contours of military psychology in the United States through the two world wars and after 1945 until the late 20th century. Cites and provides references to the initial researches published in the domain. Narrates in detail the initial struggles of American military psychology to establish itself. Also discusses the contemporary research directions and funding within the defense establishment of the United States.

Gal, Reuven, and David Mangelsdorff, eds. 1991. Handbook of military psychology . New York. John Wiley & Sons.

Provides an exhaustive overview of goals and methods of military psychology. Divided into seven sections and thirty-nine chapters dealing with: selection, classification and placement in military services; human factors and military performance; environmental factors and military performance; leadership in military performance; individual and group behavior; clinical and consultative/organizational psychology; and special subjects and special situations. Also indicates toward evolving specializations within the field that have come to fruition since the publication of the volume.

Hacker Hughes, H. Jamie, M. McCauley, and L. Wilson. 2019. History of military psychology. BMJ Military Health 165: 68–70.

Provides an overview of the origins, history, and current composition of military psychology in the United Kingdom. Describes the major developments in research practices and applications of military psychology during the two world wars and thereafter. Focuses upon the growth of clinical domain within military psychology in the postwar years, especially since the late 20th century, and describes the modalities through which civilian and uniformed psychologists ensure technically sound and timely delivery of mental health services.

Kennedy, Carrie H., and Eric A. Zillmer, eds. 2022. Military psychology: Clinical and operational applications . 3d ed. New York: Guilford Press.

Significantly revised and updated edition covering contemporary issues and challenges in clinical practice and its operational application owing to the changing nature of warfare, prolonged deployments, counterterrorism and counterintelligence efforts, peacekeeping and negotiation strategies. Covers topics like assessment and selection of high-risk operational personnel, psychology of terrorists, and crisis and hostage negotiation and disaster mental health.

Kumar, U. 2019. Routledge international handbook of military psychology & mental health . London and New York: Routledge.

DOI: 10.4324/9780429281266

A compendium bringing forth the state of the art in military psychology theory, practice, and future prospects. With contributions spanning the globe, comprehensively elucidates international perspectives in three broad domains and thirty-five chapters. Discusses evolution of the discipline over the years; challenges to soldiering brought about by the changing nature of warfare; and mental health issues and prospects in the military.

Laurence, Janice H., and Michael D. Matthews. 2012. Oxford handbook of military psychology . New York and Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.

DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195399325.001.0001

Explores the critical link between psychology and military, covering a wide array of topics organized across five relevant sections: clinical psychology, general psychological contributions to eclectic emerging concerns, industrial/organizational psychology, applied experimental psychology, and social psychology. Provides an extensive overview of military applications of psychological science.

Mastroianni, George R. 2022. History and development of military psychology . In Handbook of military sciences . Edited by A. M. Sookermany. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

Considers the historical connection between psychology and the military drawing from the ancient Greek scholars’ conceptualizations and places these in the contemporary context. Delves into selection and training, leadership, and combat trauma as three early domains of military psychology, and expands upon these to elaborate upon the contemporary applications and developments.

Matthews, Michael D., and Janice H. Laurence, eds. 2011. Military psychology (Reference Collection) . Los Angeles: SAGE.

A four-volume collection that aims to highlight significant developments in military psychology that have implications for psychological research and practice in general. The four volumes comprehensively bring together the scholarship on selection, training, and performance; applied experimental and engineering psychology; stress and resilience; leadership, culture and morale.

back to top

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login .

Oxford Bibliographies Online is available by subscription and perpetual access to institutions. For more information or to contact an Oxford Sales Representative click here .

• About Psychology »
• Meet the Editorial Board »
• Abnormal Psychology
• Academic Assessment
• Acculturation and Health
• Action Regulation Theory
• Action Research
• Addictive Behavior
• Adolescence
• Adoption, Social, Psychological, and Evolutionary Perspect...
• Advanced Theory of Mind
• Affective Forecasting
• Affirmative Action
• Ageism at Work
• Allport, Gordon
• Alzheimer’s Disease
• Ambulatory Assessment in Behavioral Science
• Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA)
• Animal Behavior
• Animal Learning
• Anxiety Disorders
• Art and Aesthetics, Psychology of
• Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, and Psychology
• Assessment and Clinical Applications of Individual Differe...
• Attachment in Social and Emotional Development across the ...
• Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in Adults
• Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in Childre...
• Attitudinal Ambivalence
• Attraction in Close Relationships
• Attribution Theory
• Authoritarian Personality
• Bayesian Statistical Methods in Psychology
• Behavior Therapy, Rational Emotive
• Behavioral Economics
• Behavioral Genetics
• Belief Perseverance
• Bereavement and Grief
• Biological Psychology
• Birth Order
• Body Image in Men and Women
• Bystander Effect
• Categorical Data Analysis in Psychology
• Childhood and Adolescence, Peer Victimization and Bullying...
• Clark, Mamie Phipps
• Clinical Neuropsychology
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Consistency Theories
• Cognitive Dissonance Theory
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Communication, Nonverbal Cues and
• Comparative Psychology
• Competence to Stand Trial: Restoration Services
• Competency to Stand Trial
• Computational Psychology
• Conflict Management in the Workplace
• Conformity, Compliance, and Obedience
• Consciousness
• Coping Processes
• Correspondence Analysis in Psychology
• Counseling Psychology
• Creativity at Work
• Critical Thinking
• Cross-Cultural Psychology
• Cultural Psychology
• Daily Life, Research Methods for Studying
• Data Science Methods for Psychology
• Data Sharing in Psychology
• Death and Dying
• Deceiving and Detecting Deceit
• Defensive Processes
• Depressive Disorders
• Development, Prenatal
• Developmental Psychology (Cognitive)
• Developmental Psychology (Social)
• Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM...
• Discrimination
• Dissociative Disorders
• Drugs and Behavior
• Eating Disorders
• Educational Settings, Assessment of Thinking in
• Effect Size
• Embodiment and Embodied Cognition
• Emerging Adulthood
• Emotional Intelligence
• Empathy and Altruism
• Employee Stress and Well-Being
• Environmental Neuroscience and Environmental Psychology
• Ethics in Psychological Practice
• Event Perception
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Expansive Posture
• Experimental Existential Psychology
• Exploratory Data Analysis
• Eyewitness Testimony
• Eysenck, Hans
• Factor Analysis
• Festinger, Leon
• Five-Factor Model of Personality
• Flynn Effect, The
• Forgiveness
• Friendships, Children's
• Fundamental Attribution Error/Correspondence Bias
• Gambler's Fallacy
• Game Theory and Psychology
• Geropsychology, Clinical
• Global Mental Health
• Habit Formation and Behavior Change
• Health Psychology Research and Practice, Measurement in
• Heider, Fritz
• Heuristics and Biases
• History of Psychology
• Human Factors
• Humanistic Psychology
• Implicit Association Test (IAT)
• Industrial and Organizational Psychology
• Inferential Statistics in Psychology
• Insanity Defense, The
• Intelligence
• Intelligence, Crystallized and Fluid
• Intercultural Psychology
• Intergroup Conflict
• International Classification of Diseases and Related Healt...
• International Psychology
• Interviewing in Forensic Settings
• Intimate Partner Violence, Psychological Perspectives on
• Introversion–Extraversion
• Item Response Theory
• Law, Psychology and
• Lazarus, Richard
• Learned Helplessness
• Learning Theory
• Learning versus Performance
• LGBTQ+ Romantic Relationships
• Lie Detection in a Forensic Context
• Life-Span Development
• Locus of Control
• Loneliness and Health
• Mathematical Psychology
• Meaning in Life
• Mechanisms and Processes of Peer Contagion
• Media Violence, Psychological Perspectives on
• Mediation Analysis
• Memories, Autobiographical
• Memories, Flashbulb
• Memories, Repressed and Recovered
• Memory, False
• Memory, Human
• Memory, Implicit versus Explicit
• Memory in Educational Settings
• Memory, Semantic
• Meta-Analysis
• Metacognition
• Metaphor, Psychological Perspectives on
• Microaggressions
• Military Psychology
• Mindfulness
• Mindfulness and Education
• Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI)
• Money, Psychology of
• Moral Conviction
• Moral Development
• Moral Psychology
• Moral Reasoning
• Nature versus Nurture Debate in Psychology
• Neuroscience of Associative Learning
• Nonergodicity in Psychology and Neuroscience
• Nonparametric Statistical Analysis in Psychology
• Observational (Non-Randomized) Studies
• Obsessive-Complusive Disorder (OCD)
• Occupational Health Psychology
• Olfaction, Human
• Operant Conditioning
• Optimism and Pessimism
• Organizational Justice
• Parenting Stress
• Parenting Styles
• Parents' Beliefs about Children
• Path Models
• Peace Psychology
• Perception, Person
• Performance Appraisal
• Personality and Health
• Personality Disorders
• Personality Psychology
• Person-Centered and Experiential Psychotherapies: From Car...
• Phenomenological Psychology
• Placebo Effects in Psychology
• Play Behavior
• Positive Psychological Capital (PsyCap)
• Positive Psychology
• Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)
• Prejudice and Stereotyping
• Pretrial Publicity
• Prisoner's Dilemma
• Problem Solving and Decision Making
• Procrastination
• Prosocial Behavior
• Prosocial Spending and Well-Being
• Protocol Analysis
• Psycholinguistics
• Psychological Literacy
• Psychological Perspectives on Food and Eating
• Psychology, Political
• Psychoneuroimmunology
• Psychophysics, Visual
• Psychotherapy
• Psychotic Disorders
• Publication Bias in Psychology
• Reasoning, Counterfactual
• Rehabilitation Psychology
• Relationships
• Reliability–Contemporary Psychometric Conceptions
• Religion, Psychology and
• Replication Initiatives in Psychology
• Research Methods
• Risk Taking
• Role of the Expert Witness in Forensic Psychology, The
• Sample Size Planning for Statistical Power and Accurate Es...
• Schizophrenic Disorders
• School Psychology
• School Psychology, Counseling Services in
• Self, Gender and
• Self, Psychology of the
• Self-Construal
• Self-Control
• Self-Deception
• Self-Determination Theory
• Self-Efficacy
• Self-Esteem
• Self-Monitoring
• Self-Regulation in Educational Settings
• Self-Report Tests, Measures, and Inventories in Clinical P...
• Sensation Seeking
• Sex and Gender
• Sexual Minority Parenting
• Sexual Orientation
• Signal Detection Theory and its Applications
• Simpson's Paradox in Psychology
• Single People
• Single-Case Experimental Designs
• Skinner, B.F.
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Small Groups
• Social Class and Social Status
• Social Cognition
• Social Neuroscience
• Social Support
• Social Touch and Massage Therapy Research
• Somatoform Disorders
• Spatial Attention
• Sports Psychology
• Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE): Icon and Controversy
• Stereotype Threat
• Stereotypes
• Stress and Coping, Psychology of
• Student Success in College
• Subjective Wellbeing Homeostasis
• Taste, Psychological Perspectives on
• Teaching of Psychology
• Terror Management Theory
• Testing and Assessment
• The Concept of Validity in Psychological Assessment
• The Neuroscience of Emotion Regulation
• The Reasoned Action Approach and the Theories of Reasoned ...
• The Weapon Focus Effect in Eyewitness Memory
• Theory of Mind
• Therapy, Cognitive-Behavioral
• Thinking Skills in Educational Settings
• Time Perception
• Trait Perspective
• Trauma Psychology
• Twin Studies
• Type A Behavior Pattern (Coronary Prone Personality)
• Unconscious Processes
• Video Games and Violent Content
• Virtues and Character Strengths
• Women and Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM...
• Women, Psychology of
• Work Well-Being
• Workforce Training Evaluation
• Wundt, Wilhelm
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility

Powered by:

• [185.80.151.41]
• 185.80.151.41

What Is Military Psychology?

An overview of a vital and diverse subfield of psychology..

Posted December 2, 2013

• Why Education Is Important
• Take our ADHD Test
• Find a Child Therapist

I fell in love with psychology when I was 12 years old. My brother, who was in his first year of college, came home to visit one weekend. I rummaged through the backseat of his car and discovered his introductory psychology text mixed in with the usual flotsam and jetsam found in the back seats of cars driven by college students. Since it was late in the fall term, and since the book appeared as if it had never been opened (he flunked out of college that term, so this in fact probably was the case), I took the liberty of “appropriating” his book for my own use. Over the next couple of weeks, I read it cover to cover. I found every single topic fascinating. I quickly became the family psychologist, ready to dispense psychological advice to anyone who listened. I conditioned my dog to salivate to a tone. If mom had a strange dream, I was ready to interpret. I must have been a terribly annoying kid.

My childhood interests in psychology were strongly reinforced by my undergraduate experiences at Drury College. There, I was heavily influenced by the psychologist who quickly became, and remains, my mentor, Dr. Victor Agruso. He was a staunch Skinnerian, and as a freshman had me reading Beyond Freedom and Dignity and other behavioristic tomes. My interests in animal learning and behaviorism stayed with me throughout the rest of my undergraduate and graduate education , and I ultimately completed a doctor of philosophy degree with an emphasis in these areas.

But a funny thing happened upon my transition from graduate student to employed psychologist. Academic jobs in animal learning were few and far between, and I was desperate to find gainful employment. A brother (a different one this time) entered into the equation. He suggested that I contact the military because he thought they hired research psychologists. I did just that, found the pay and benefits were good, and soon found myself in the United States Air Force Officer Training School (OTS) in San Antonio, Texas. Upon completion, I was awarded an Air Force commission and was assigned to duty in an Air Force psychology laboratory. Almost faster than I can tell the story, I was a military psychologist!

Most people know what the military is and does. Somewhat fewer know what a psychologist is and does. But very few know what a military psychologist is and does. Introducing yourself as a military psychologist at a social event is almost the perfect icebreaker. “So, a military psychologist, eh? I guess you provide therapy to soldiers, huh?” My response is along the lines of “Well, some of us do that, but let me tell you more . . . .”

So, what is military psychology? To tell someone that you are a military psychologist does not convey much information. Military psychology includes the subdisciplines of social, experimental, industrial, organizational, human factors engineering, and clinical/counseling psychology, just to name a few. Some military psychologists are uniformed members of the Army, Air Force, Navy, or Marines. Others are civilians employed by the Department of Defense. Still others work in the private sector, from small businesses to huge corporations that support military programs. And some are traditional academic psychologists who, by virtue of their research focus, define themselves as military psychologists.

Twelve years of war have exposed some glaring deficiencies in our understanding of human behavior and adjustment. With a small, all volunteer military force, our career military men and women have deployed to war over and over again. I have friends and colleagues who have spent half of the past 12 years deployed in combat. The psychological toll of the seemingly unending deployment cycle has been immense. Among our military, suicide rates are at all time highs. Alcohol abuse and conduct disorders are common. Families suffer from discord and instability. Seldom in our history has there been such an overwhelming need for the science and practice of psychology.

War has always driven advances in science, and psychology is no exception. In World War I, the U.S. Army needed tools to classify millions of recruits to jobs in which they could succeed. Dr. Robert Yerkes, President of the American Psychological Association (APA), rallied members of the APA to support the military, and the Army Alpha and Army Beta selection tests were quickly developed and administered to millions of recruits. Technology developments in World War II gave rise to engineering psychology. And common to all wars, there is the need to better understand combat stress . This may entail strategies to train soldiers to be more resilient, as well as to provide clinical psychologists with more effective tools for treating combat stress disorders.

The wars of the 21st century have and will continue to challenge psychological science and practice. I argue in my book, Head Strong: How Psychology is Revolutionizing War , that psychology will be the deciding science in these wars. Nations that embrace psychology and turn to it to improve military selection, training, decision making , resilience , leadership , and cultural understanding will succeed compared to nations that focus only on building bigger and more lethal weapons. As Brigadier General (retired) Tom Kolditz writes, “If war is, as Carl von Clausewitz so elegantly stated, ‘ politics by other means,’ then those politics and means are inherently psychological. War only exists in the human dimension.”

Military psychology, then, is simply psychology applied in a military context. It is an exciting time to be a military psychologist. And how do you become a military psychologist? The best answer is to study whatever area of psychology you find most interesting. Clinical, learning and cognition , biopsychology, stress and resilience, engineering psychology —it doesn’t matter. Go to graduate school and immerse yourself in the material that excites you the most. When you emerge with your advanced degree in hand, there will be a place for you in military psychology. And, it won’t hurt to listen to your older brothers or sisters.

Note: The views expressed herein are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the United States Military Academy, the Department of the Army, or the Department of Defense.

Michael D. Matthews, Ph.D. , is a professor of engineering psychology at the United States Military Academy. He is the author of Head Strong: How Psychology is Revolutionizing War and co-author of The Character Edge: Leading and Winning with Integrity.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

It’s increasingly common for someone to be diagnosed with a condition such as ADHD or autism as an adult. A diagnosis often brings relief, but it can also come with as many questions as answers.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

Log in using your username and password

• Search More Search for this keyword Advanced search
• Latest content
• Current issue
• For authors
• BMJ Journals

You are here

• Volume 165, Issue 2
• History of military psychology
• Article Text
• Article info
• Citation Tools
• Rapid Responses
• Article metrics

• Jamie Hacker Hughes 1 ,
• M McCauley 2 , 3 and
• 1 Northern Hub for Military Veterans and Families Research , Northumbria University , Newcastle upon Tyne , UK
• 2 School of Psychology, Trinity College, University of Dublin , Dublin , Ireland
• 3 Defence Clinical Psychology Service, Ministry of Defence , London , UK
• Correspondence to Professor Jamie Hacker Hughes, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE7 7XA, UK; profjamiehh{at}gmail.com

Military psychology is a specialist discipline within applied psychology. It entails the application of psychological science to military operations, systems and personnel. The specialty was formally founded during World War I in the UK and the USA, and it was integral to many early concepts and interventions for psychological and neuropsychological trauma. It also established a fundamental basis for the psychological assessment and selection of military personnel. During and after World War II, military psychology continued to make significant contributions to aviation psychology, cognitive testing, rehabilitation psychology and many models of psychotherapy. Military psychology now consists of several subspecialties, including clinical, research and occupational psychology, with the latter often referred to in the USA as industrial/organisational psychology. This article will provide an overview of the origins, history and current composition of military psychology in the UK, with select international illustrations also being offered.

https://doi.org/10.1136/jramc-2018-001048

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions.

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Contributors All authors contributed to the paper in proportion to their position on the author list.

Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Competing interests None declared.

Patient consent Not required.

Provenance and peer review Commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Read the full text or download the PDF:

Interested in Applying for Membership?

Membership in the division provides the opportunity to network with students and professional psychologists in the field. With our social networking groups, listserv, APA convention social events, and large international network, we hope that you will make new friends, network to find new colleagues, and connect with new mentors in a supportive community.

A New Psychology of War: The Science of Resilience and the Militarization of Positive Psychology

• First Online: 22 November 2022

Cite this chapter

• Johannes Lang 3  

374 Accesses

1 Citations

‘Resilience’ is reshaping the science and politics of trauma in the twenty-first century. This chapter traces the history of this concept, from when it entered psychology in the 1960s until the US military adopted it in the 2000s. Resilience originally belonged to developmental psychopathology, not traumatology. But the effects of 9/11 defied scientific expectations, and psychologists began to argue that it was necessary to rethink how the mind reacts to such extreme experiences. As the war in Iraq deteriorated and a mental-health crisis loomed within the armed forces, the US Army asked ‘positive psychology’ to increase the resilience of its soldiers. But in doing so, the Army overlooked important conclusions from half a century of psychological research on resilience.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Overview of the Volume

War and Post Traumatic Growth

Resilience Revisited: Toward an Expanding Understanding of Post-disaster Adaptation

Personal interview, New York City, April 5, 2019.

Personal interview, Boston, November 6, 2017.

Abramson, L. Y., M. E. P. Seligman, and J. D. Teasdale. 1978. “Learned helplessness in humans: Critique and reformulation.” Journal of Abnormal Psychology 87 (1): 49–74. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.87.1.49 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Alexander, D. E. 2013. “Resilience and disaster risk reduction: An etymological journey.” Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences 13: 2707–2716. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-13-2707-2013 .

American Psychiatric Association. 1980. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 3rd ed . Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

Google Scholar  

Bartemeier, L., et al. 1946. “Combat exhaustion.” Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 104: 358–389. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005053-194610000-00002 .

Bonanno, G. A. 2004. “Loss, trauma, and human resilience: Have we underestimated the human capacity to thrive after extremely aversive events?” American Psychologist 59 (1): 20–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.59.1.20 .

Bonanno, G. A. 2009. The Other Side of Sadness: What the New Science of Bereavement Tells Us About Life After Loss . New York, NY: Basic Books.

Bonanno, G. A., C. B. Wortman, D. R. Lehman, R. G. Tweed, M. Haring, J. Sonnega, D. Carr, and R. M. Nesse. 2002. “Resilience to loss and chronic grief: A prospective study from pre-loss to 18-months post-loss.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 83 (5): 1150–1164. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.83.5.1150 .

Bonanno, G. A., S. Galea, A. Bucciarelli, and D. Vlahov. 2006. “Psychological resilience after disaster: New York City in the aftermath of the September 11th terrorist attack.” Psychological Science 17 (3): 181–186. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01682.x .

Breslau, N., and R. C. Kessler. 2001. “The stressor criterion in DSM-IV posttraumatic stress disorder: An empirical investigation.” Biological Psychiatry 50 (9): 699–704. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0006-3223(01)01167-2 .

DeFraia, D. 2019. “The unknown legacy of military mental health programs.” The War Horse , October 2. https://thewarhorse.org/the-unknown-legacy-of-military-mental-health-programs/

Denning, L. A., M. Meisnere, and K. E. Warner, eds. 2014. Preventing Psychological Disorders in Service Members and Their Families: An Assessment of Programs . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Ehrenreich, B. 2009. Bright-sided: How Positive Thinking Is Undermining America . New York, NY: Metropolitan Books.

Eidelson, R., M. Pilisuk, and S. Soldz. 2011. “The dark side of Comprehensive Soldier Fitness.” American Psychologist 66 (7): 643–644. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025272 .

Fassin, D., and R. Rechtman. 2009. Empire of Trauma: An Inquiry into the Condition of Victimhood . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Garmezy, N. 1985. “Competence and adaptation in adult schizophrenic patients and children at risk.” In Research in the Schizophrenic Disorders , edited by Robert Cancro and Stanley R. Dean, 69–112. Dordrecht: Springer.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Harms, P. D., M. Herian, D. V. Krasikova, A. J. Vanhove, and P. B. Lester. 2013. The Comprehensive Soldier and Family Fitness Evaluation. Report #4: Evaluation of Resilience Training and Mental and Behavioral Health Outcomes . Washington, DC: Department of Defense.

Hiroto, D. S. 1974. “Locus of control and learned helplessness.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 102 (2): 187–193. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0035910 .

Hiroto, D. S., and M. E. P. Seligman. 1974. “Generality of learned helplessness in man.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 31 (2): 311–327. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076270 .

Horowitz, D. 2018. Happier? The History of a Cultural Movement That Aspired to Transform America . New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Internal memorandum. 2008. “Summary of initial meeting Casey, Seligman, et al.” Department of Defense. Accessed July 14 2021. https://thewarhorse.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/2.-Strategy-for-CJCS-converted.pdf

Kessler, R. C., P. Berglund, O. Demler, R. Jin, K. R. Merikangas, and E. E. Walters. 2005. “Lifetime prevalence and age-of-onset of DSM-IV disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication.” Archives of General Psychiatry 62 (7): 593–602. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.62.6.593 .

Kieran, D. 2019. Signature Wounds: The Untold Story of the Military Mental Health Crisis . New York, NY: New York University Press.

Konnikova, M. 2016. “How people learn to become resilient.” The New Yorker , February 11. https://www.newyorker.com/science/maria-konnikova/the-secret-formula-for-resilience

Lang, J. 2020. “‘A test of character’: The positive psychology of war.” In Geopolitical Amnesia: The Rise of the Right and the Crisis of Liberal Memory , edited by Vibeke Schou Tjalve, 48–66. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.

Linley, P. A., and S. Joseph. 2005. “The human capacity for growth through adversity.” American Psychologist 60 (3): 262–4. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.60.3.262b .

Litz, B. T., M. J. Gray, R. A. Bryant, and A. B. Adler. 2002. “Early intervention for trauma: Current status and future directions.” Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice 9 (2): 112–134. https://doi.org/10.1093/clipsy.9.2.112 .

McNally, R. J. 2003. “Progress and controversy in the study of posttraumatic stress disorder.” Annual Review of Psychology 54: 229–252. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145112 .

McNally, R. J. 2005. “Troubles in traumatology.” The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry 50 (13): 815–816. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674370505001301 .

Morris, D. J. 2015. The Evil Hours: A Biography of Post-traumatic Stress Disorder . New York, NY: Mariner.

National Institute of Mental Health. 2002. Mental Health and Mass Violence: Evidence-Based Early Psychological Intervention for Victims/Survivors of Mass Violence. A Workshop to Reach Consensus on Best Practices . NIH Publication No. 02-5138. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

Newman, R. 2005. “APA’s resilience initiative.” Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 36 (3): 227–228. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.36.3.227 .

Priest, D., and A. Hull. 2007. “Soldiers face neglect, frustration at Army’s top medical facility.” Washington Post , February 18.

Scott, W. J. 1990. “PTSD in DSM-III: A case in the politics of diagnosis and disease.” Social Problems 37 (3): 294–310. https://doi.org/10.2307/800744 .

Sederer, L. I., C. B. Lanzara, S. M. Essock, S. A. Donahue, J. L. Stone, and S. Galea. 2011. “Lessons learned from the New York State mental health response to the September 11, 2001, attacks.” Psychiatric Services 62 (9), 1085–1089. https://doi.org/10.1176/ps.62.9.pss6209_1085 .

Seligman, M. E. P. 2006. Learned Optimism: How to Change Your Mind and Your Life . New York, NY: Vintage.

Seligman, M. E. P. 2011. Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-Being . Washington, DC: Free Press.

Seligman, M. E. P. 2018. “The Hoffman report, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the defense of the nation: A personal view.” Health Psychology Open July–December: 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/2055102918796192 .

Seligman, M. E. P., and M. Csikszentmihalyi. 2000. “Positive psychology: An introduction.” American Psychologist 55 (1): 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.5 .

Selva, J. 2021. “Master Resilience Training (MRT) in the US Army: PowerPoint & Interview.” Positive Psychology , June 5. https://positivepsychology.com/master-resilience-training-mrt/

Steenkamp, M. M., W. P. Nash, and B. T. Litz. 2013. “Post-traumatic Stress Disorder: Review of the Comprehensive Soldier Fitness Program.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine 44 (5): 507–512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2013.01.013 .

Weiner, B. 1972. “Attribution theory, achievement motivation, and the educational process.” Review of Educational Research 42 (2): 203–215. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543042002203 .

Weiner, B., and A. Kukla. 1970. “An attributional analysis of achievement motivation.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 15 (1): 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0029211 .

Werner, E. E. 1989. “High-risk children in young adulthood: A longitudinal study from birth to 32 years.” American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 59 (1): 72–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.1989.tb01636.x .

Werner, E. E., J. M. Bierman, and F. E. French. 1971. The Children of Kauai: A Longitudinal Study from the Prenatal Period to Age Ten . Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.

Wortman, C. B., and R. C. Silver. 1989. “The myths of coping with loss.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 57 (3): 349–57. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-006x.57.3.349 .

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Peace and Violence Unit, Danish Institute for International Studies, Copenhagen, Denmark

Johannes Lang

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Johannes Lang .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Department of History, Classics & Archaeology, Birkbeck, University of London, London, UK

Joanna Bourke

Robin May Schott

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Lang, J. (2022). A New Psychology of War: The Science of Resilience and the Militarization of Positive Psychology. In: Bourke, J., Schott, R.M. (eds) Resilience. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13367-1_2

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13367-1_2

Published : 22 November 2022

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-13366-4

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-13367-1

eBook Packages : Social Sciences Social Sciences (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

• Military psychology
• Applied psychology
• Get an email alert for Military psychology
• Get the RSS feed for Military psychology

Showing 1 - 13 of 35

View by: Cover Page List Articles

Sort by: Recent Popular

Holding and rupture: Describing post-traumatic stress among former UK Army and Royal Marine personnel deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan

Laura Palmer, Walter Busuttil,  [ ... ], Sharon A. M. Stevelink

Partners’ experiences of their loved ones’ trauma and PTSD: An ongoing journey of loss and gain

Rosie Powling, Dora Brown, Sahra Tekin, Jo Billings

Understanding evidence and provision of services around social isolation and loneliness of military widow/ers: A scoping review

Amy Johnson, Mary Moreland,  [ ... ], Gemma Wilson-Menzfeld

The physical, psychological, and social impacts of participation in the Invictus Pathways Program: A qualitative analysis of veterans’ perceptions and experiences

Dannielle Post, Amy Baker,  [ ... ], Gaynor Parfitt

Stock price crash risk and military connected board: Evidence from Thailand

Sirimon Treepongkaruna, Pattanaporn Chatjuthamard, Arnat Leemakdej

The military spouse experience of living alongside their serving/veteran partner with a mental health issue: A systematic review and narrative synthesis

Emma Senior, Amanda Clarke, Gemma Wilson-Menzfeld

Trends in suicide rates by race and ethnicity among members of the United States Army

Lisa A. Brenner, Jeri E. Forster,  [ ... ], Rachel Sayko Adams

A systematic review of resilient performance in defence and security settings

Marc Vincent Jones, Nathan Smith,  [ ... ], Martin Jones

The “trauma pitch”: How stigma emerges for Iraq and Afghanistan veterans seeking disability compensation

Katinka Hooyer

On the existence of momentum in professional football

Paul J. Roebber, Bryan M. Burlingame, Anthony deWinter

Costs, benefits, and cost-benefit of Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality versus enhanced treatment as usual

Phoebe K. McCutchan, Brian T. Yates,  [ ... ], Katherine Anne Comtois

Transition from military to civilian: Identity, social connectedness, and veteran wellbeing

Mal Flack, Leah Kite

When personality gets under the skin: Need for uniqueness and body modifications

Selina M. Weiler, Bjarn-Ove Tetzlaff, Philipp Yorck Herzberg, Thomas Jacobsen

Connect with Us

• PLOS ONE on Twitter
• PLOS on Facebook

Military Master Resilience Training Verses Positive Psychology Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Overview on military master resilience training, overview of positive psychology, similarities, differences, mrt vs. the positive psychology (merits), mrt vs. positive psychology (demerits).

Military involvement in war creates tension to both militants and their respective families. This tension consequently results to post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and thus the army has to responds to this problem. In the United States of America, the army formed a Military Master Resilience Training (MRT) to avert psychological trauma issues.

This MRT program bases on the positive psychology principles, though to a certain extent, they somehow differ. Comprehensive Soldier Fitness (CSF) program based on positive psychology principles. Despite the fact that both positive psychology and MRT programs have a common goal, several differences including time spent in training, the performance assessment tools incorporated and the number of program elements each of them use somehow differ.

The modern world suffers from several challenges including international civil wars, crime, and terrorism. While several service members and their families have managed to cope with the condition, majority experience difficulties in handling stress at a certain point. Due to this blemish, military and security systems in every nation are prepared for any challenging encounters. Tension is always surrounding service members involved in combat and their families (Cornum, Matthews and Seligman, 2011).

For these soldiers and their families to remain resilient to the posttraumatic stress disorder that comes after or during war, MRT program is necessary. This program largely depends on principles of positive psychology. This essay seeks to explore the relationship between military master resilience training and positive psychology, by examining the similarities and differences in these programs.

Military Master Resilience Training (MRT) is a U.S. based resilience-training program, which provides optimism education to non-commissioned officers. The training is specific for soldiers to ensure that combat members are prepared to have competence in mental alertness, confidence, self-awareness, and self-efficiency. The course is one of the most significant programs in the U.S. combat as it provides foundational support of the Comprehensive Soldier Fitness program (CSF).

According to Reivich, Seligman, and McBride (2011), this program comes in three major components including preparation, sustainment, and enhancement. Preparation component began in Pennsylvania University of Positive Psychology. This component takes the first eight days of MRT training. The sustainment component, which underlines readying training program, emerged from research conducted by Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (Cornum, Matthews and Seligman, 2011).

Positive psychology refers to a branch of psychology that emphasizes on promoting mental performance of human beings beyond normal mental health. Positive psychology is a recent psychology concept that began in 1998. The concept resulted from Martin Seligman’s interest of instilling resilience in the U.S. army.

Cornum, Matthews, and Seligman (2011) assert that positive psychology resulted from military activities and thus widely practiced in army. It aims at recognizing and replacing automatic negative thoughts and enhancing positive attitudes through a series of organized trainings. Positive psychology has existed in academic curriculums, and research has empirically proven it in several studies.

This psychology emphasizes that individuals should improve their lives and health through positive thoughts. By doing so, one is capable of living positively regardless of the existing challenges in the surrounding environment (Kauffman, 2006). Positive psychology, enthused by empirical proof, mostly emphasizes on dynamic approaches towards handling pain, as well the enhancing importance of calming potency and virtues to a minimum suffering.

There are several similarities between Master Resilience Training and Positive psychology. Firstly, both practices have similar objectives or rather aims. Scientifically, according to Kauffman (2006), positive psychology is a coaching science that primarily aims at shifting individual’s attention away from pain and pathology and diverting it towards optimistically concentrating on gaining strength vision and dreams, and Master Resilience Training purports the same.

According to Reivich, McBride, and Seligman (2011), Military Resilience Training Program is a training program whose aim is to provide optimism education to the U.S. combat non-commissioned officers to ensure that combat members are prepared to have competence in mental alertness, confidence, self-awareness, and self-efficiency. In simple terms, they both aim at providing psychological preparedness to fit in challenging environments.

Their main theme is to ensure that people do not suffer from psychological disorders resulting from stresses developed through facing confrontations. The two disciplines agree with each other that exercise and mental couching help in reducing psychological disorders.

Master Resilience Training and positive psychology serve under similar principles initially developed by the Penn Positive Psychology Center. The principles bare three components, which are applicable in both MRT and positive psychology including preparation, sustainment, and enhancement.

In Military Resilience Training, Reivich, McBride and Seligman (2011) assert, “The preparation component teaches resilience fundamentals based on the Penn Resilience Program (PRP) curriculum as well as on other empirically validated interventions from positive psychology” (p.25). On the other hand, Kauffman (2006) explains that positive psychology, “provides a robust theoretical and empirical base for the artful practice of life and executive coaching” (p.219).

They both emphasize that for training should be successful, personal happiness is mandatory. In MRT, preparation trainers achieve the preparation component through large group plenary sessions where the officers get an introduction to key components of the program. Regarding preparation in positive psychology, the training ensures that members receive an orientation into the training program before the training begins officially.

Despite the numerous similarities, MRT and positive psychology differ in some aspects. There are different program elements that are applicable in MRT and positive psychology. Each of the training has different numbers of program elements.

MRT program, which involves Comprehensive Soldier Fitness (CSF), focuses on four program elements namely “assessment of social, emotional, spiritual fitness, individual learning elements, formal resilience training, and training Army Masters how to inculcate better philosophy skills and resilience to their assistants” (Cornum, Matthews, & Seligman, 2011, p.3). On the other hand, positive psychology possesses six program elements as well, but differs from the Military Resilience Training.

According to Kauffman (2006), positive psychology harbors six elements viz. “clear and immediate feedback, absence of self-consciousness, merging action and awareness, sense of control, intrinsic motivation or auto telic experience and balance skills and challenge” (p.228). However, all the elements have specific significance in each of the programs, as they are part of the training.

Another significant difference in the programs is time. The time span spent in the MRT training differs from the one practiced in the positive psychology, depending on the component. Since CSF underscores resilience in soldiers as one of the MRT programs, CFS training differs with positive psychology training in terms of time spent to cover the program.

According to Reivich, McBride and Seligman (2011), the United States Master Resilience Trainer course takes a span of 10 days to teach soldiers on resilience proficiency. On the other hand, the positive psychology program takes a longer time in training compared to the MRT program.

Kauffman (2006) asserts, “The effect of this one-week self-administered exercise was still strongly evident at follow-up assessments six months later” (p.233). In the contest of the assessment, the MRT assesses soldiers immediately after a soldier joins the army and reassessment takes place throughout a soldier’s life, while in the positive psychology, the assessment takes place within six months of training.

MRT and positive psychology differ in terms of the assessment tools they incorporate in their programs. MRT uses the Global Assessment Tool (GAT), which focuses on trailing the psychological fitness of soldiers by examining aspects of resilience available in soldiers including social, family, spiritual, and emotional (Cornum, Matthews, & Seligman, 2011). GAT is an online-administered exam in the form of questions, which assess four dimensions of psychological fitness.

The GAT tool is not for selecting soldiers for schooling, promotion, or even command, but primarily used to assess soldiers’ mental agility. On the other hand, positive psychology program uses a self-administered questionnaire to measure client’s level of happiness and assist them to avoid pessimistic ideas during training (Kauffman, 2006). Positive psychology training uses the satisfaction scale as well, which involves measuring client’s satisfaction during the training.

MRT and positive psychology are equally important in human life. MRT is most beneficial to individuals working in the U.S. military. Despite the fact that it involves families through its preparation component where civilians mix with soldiers in the breakout sessions with facilitator teams, this does not fully benefit civilians since they miss several elements of the training.

According to Reivich, Seligman, & McBride, (2011), after the training of the year 2009, soldiers evaluated the program, and according to their view thought the training helps soldiers to develop personal and professional life skills, and “MRT training should be mandatory for all ranks, families, and civilians” (p.32).

In this context, positive psychology has found its way into schools, businesses, and therapies proving significant in spreading the positive elements of psychology to the rest of the civilians. This aspect portrays MRT training program as biased and not beneficial to the entire population.

Undoubtedly, positive psychology enhances wellness in mind through emphasizing on crucial aspects of personal development. However, the chances of MRT and positive psychology proving excellent in handling human post-traumatic disorders and related disorders are minimal.

Both of them significantly overemphasize on personal development through personal growth and autonomy and thus pose a threat to the future perception on medical treatment, which has also proved somehow significant in handling chronic psychological disorders. This overemphasis will automatically displace the importance of treatment-based approaches such as vaccination against depression, which is one of the most significant medical prevention measures currently used and proved successful.

Traditional treatment oriented clinical psychology is significant for it treats veterans experiencing combat-stress related symptoms. Cornum, Matthews, and Seligman (2011), postulate that the medical interventions “develop improved screening for psychopathology, and once detected, increase the therapeutic services available” (p.4). This clearly demonstrates how too much reliance on positive psychology and MRT may turn harmful.

Concentrating too much on the personal strengths underpins the fact that human weaknesses set numerous lessons in one’s life as well as triggering employment of proper intervention to avoid the repeat of such weaknesses (Kauffman, 2006).

Actually, it is not advisable to ignore one’s weaknesses and emphasize on one’s strengths. Too much overemphasis on strengths will tend to ignore other vital challenges facing the world. Reivich, Seligman, & McBride, (2011, p. 29) assert, “Challenging counterproductive thoughts is not about replacing every negative thought with a positive one”, rather it is a technique of helping someone to avoid distracting thoughts.

In fact, it leads to building of extraordinary confidence in someone, which may turn as harmful and put an individual in danger. In the context of training, not all individuals might be positive throughout the training session, and thus individual thoughts and perception can lead to incomplete acquisition of skills if members can influence others negatively. Therefore, achieving the goal of positive strengths in the MRT and positive psychology might not be successful.

Military is a very challenging profession, and with the increasing cases of civil wars, tension surrounds combat members and their respective families. Due to this aspect, two main approaches help to enhance resilience and curb psychological and physical disorders that affect soldiers. Military Resilience Training uses four important principles that are coherent with the positive psychology.

MRT and positive psychology have similar objective. Positive psychology is a coaching science that primarily aims at shifting individual’s attention away from pain and pathology and diverting it towards optimistically concentrating on gaining strength on vision and dreams.

On the other hand, Military Resilience Training Program is a training program whose aim is to provide optimism education to the U.S. combat non-commissioned officers to ensure that they are prepared to have competence in mental alertness. However, the two programs differ in the elements they posses and the time spent for the training.

Positive psychology training takes longer time span than the MRT. In terms of program elements, positive psychology has six elements, while the MRT has only four elements. The assessment tools used by the two programs differ as well, with the MRT using GAT and the positive psychology using self administered questionnaires and satisfaction scale to measure mentally fitness and satisfaction respectively.

Cornum, R., Matthews, D. M., & Seligman, M. P. (2011). Comprehensive Soldier Fitness: Building Resilience in a Challenging Institutional Context. Journal of American Psychologist, 66 (1), 1-4.

Kauffman, C. (2006). Positive Psychology: The Science at the Heart of Coaching. In D. Stober & A. Grant (Eds.), Evidence-Based Coaching: Putting Best Practices to Work for Your Clients (pp. 219-251). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Reivich, K., Seligman, M., & McBride, S. (2011). Master Resilience Training in the U.S. Army. Journal of American Psychologist, 66 (1), 25-34.

• Electroconvulsive Therapy in the Psychiatric Treatment
• Psychological Testing in the Workplace
• Personal Development in James McBride's "The Color of Water"
• Minority Issues in The Color of Water by James McBride
• McBride Financial Services: Marketing Plan
• Concept and Importance of the Positive Thinking
• Understanding Drug & Alcohol Addiction
• Equine Assisted Psychotherapy
• Hearing Features - Voice Modulation
• Psychoanalysis: Sigmund Freud Works Examination
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2018, November 20). Military Master Resilience Training Verses Positive Psychology. https://ivypanda.com/essays/military-master-resilience-training-verses-positive-psychology/

"Military Master Resilience Training Verses Positive Psychology." IvyPanda , 20 Nov. 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/military-master-resilience-training-verses-positive-psychology/.

IvyPanda . (2018) 'Military Master Resilience Training Verses Positive Psychology'. 20 November.

IvyPanda . 2018. "Military Master Resilience Training Verses Positive Psychology." November 20, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/military-master-resilience-training-verses-positive-psychology/.

1. IvyPanda . "Military Master Resilience Training Verses Positive Psychology." November 20, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/military-master-resilience-training-verses-positive-psychology/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Military Master Resilience Training Verses Positive Psychology." November 20, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/military-master-resilience-training-verses-positive-psychology/.

IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:

• Basic site functions
• Ensuring secure, safe transactions
• Secure account login
• Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
• Remembering privacy and security settings
• Analyzing site traffic and usage
• Personalized search, content, and recommendations
• Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda

Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.

Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.

Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:

• Remembering general and regional preferences
• Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers

Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy .

To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.

Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy .

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Published: 13 September 2024

From the lab to a career in defence research

• Teresa Schubert 1  

Nature Reviews Psychology ( 2024 ) Cite this article

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Scientific community

Nature Reviews Psychology is interviewing individuals with doctoral degrees in psychology who pursued non-academic careers. We spoke with Mike Tombu about his journey from a postdoctoral fellow to a defence scientist.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles

55,14 € per year

only 4,60 € per issue

Buy this article

• Purchase on SpringerLink
• Instant access to full article PDF

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Nature Reviews Psychology https://www.nature.com/nrpsychol/

Teresa Schubert

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Teresa Schubert .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

T.S. is employed by Springer Nature, the publisher of Nature Reviews Psychology .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Schubert, T. From the lab to a career in defence research. Nat Rev Psychol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-024-00366-1

Download citation

Published : 13 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-024-00366-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.