Reserve Military Service: A Social Constructionist Perspective

• Author: Eyal Ben-Ari,James Griffith
• Published date: 01 October 2021
• Date: 01 October 2021
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/0095327X20917165
• Subject Matter: Special Forum: The Distinctive Characteristics and Expanding Role of Military Reserves

2021, Vol. 47(4) 635 –660

Reserve Military

Service: A Social

Constructionist

Perspective

James Griffith

1

and Eyal Ben-Ari

2

Abstract

This study examines reserve military service from a perspective of social con-

struction—the ways in which the reservist’s conscious experiences are constructed

to give meaning to military service. Content descriptions of conscious experiences

of reserve military service are identified in past studies. Constructions fell into four

broad categories: (1) complementary to life—reserve military service providing

wanted satisfaction not otherwise achieved, material gain, or ideological commit-

ment; (2) equitable arrangement—understood compensation for self-sacrifice;

(3) discordant identity—requirements of military life blatantly or surreptitiously

conflicting with established identity and civilian life; and (4) self-definition—reserve

military service understood as an aspect of self-identity. Directions for integrating

these constructions as a basis for future research are identified and discussed.

Keywords

reserve, military service, reservist, identification, identity

1

National Center for Veterans Studies, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA

2

Kinneret Center for Society, Security and Peace, Kinneret Academic College , IsraelCorresponding

Author:

Corresponding Author:

James Griffith, National Center for Veterans Studies, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112,

USA.

Email: jhgriffith@comcast.net

Armed Forces & Society

ªThe Author(s) 2020

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0095327X20917165

journals.sagepub.com/home/afs

Article

636 Armed Forces & Society 47(4)

Introduction

Reserves are important components in the armed forces of the democracies (Bury,

2019a; Edmunds et al., 2016; Weitz, 2007).

1

During the Cold War, reserves were

usually seen as a strategic force to be deployed in large wars, but today reserves have

been turned into an essential part of states’ “total” military force (Bury & Catignani,

2019; Dandeker et al., 2011; West, 2018). In other words, the shift has been from a

historically large static, strategic force to a dynamic, operational force that can be

and is used in a wide variety of missions (Whitlock, 2006). Partly as a result of the

integration into the total force and partially an outcome of the reduction of active

duty personnel for economic reas ons (Alcock et al., 2015; Higate et al. , 2018),

reservists now fulfill a wide array of roles that includ e logistics, disaster relief,

national emergencies, or operations abroad (Kirke, 2008). For the armed forces, the

result is that reservists can be used as flexible labor and as sources of civilian skills.

As a result, reserve military service has become more demanding, and reservists are

expected to be as ready as full-time active duty personnel.

Over the past two decades, the shift in the role and importance of reserves has led

to growing, albeit still limited, scholarly attention (Armed Forces & Society, Vol. 37,

No. 2, 2010). Changing demands on reservists have prompted research in a number

of areas such as their experiences (Griffith, 2011a; Hoge et al., 2006; Thomas et al.,

2010), recruitment (Griffith, 2018), retention (Perry et al., 1991), and readiness for

deployment (General Accounting Office, 1992). A related set of issues has been the

differences between reservists and full-time military personnel, as well as the ten-

sions marking their interrelationship (Gazit et al., 2020; Kirke, 2008). These tensions

are related, in turn, to the special features that mark reservists (Vest, 2014a). Unlike

active duty military personnel, reservists lack physical contact wi th the military

since they usually serve between a few days and a few weeks per year, only inter-

mittently attend training, and live in civilian communities often far away from

military installations, meaning that they often lack sustained ties with their units

(Edmunds et al., 2016). Further, despite greater awareness of the difficulties that

reservists face, they continue to report that they often feel they are given less priority

resources and training when compared to full-time military personnel. Moreover,

stints in the military frequently stand in tension with family dynamics or the require-

ments of civilian workplaces (Dandeker et al., 2010; Danielsson & Carlstedt, 2011;

Harvey et al., 2011; Stetz et al., 2007; Weitz, 2007; West, 2018).

Against this background, it is clear that how reservists think about and act relative

to military service depends to a large extent on their beliefs, attitudes, and intentions

regarding behaviors, other unit members, the military organization, and “service to

country.” But, how does one make sense of the diverse studies that have tried to

answer the question of how do reservists frame military service? Arguing for an

integrative analytical framework, we propose that an answer to this question

involves three interrelated sets of issues: the content of their identities, the contexts

within which they emerge, and the processes by which identities develop and are

2Armed Forces & Society XX(X)