Subjective Cohesion as Stress Buffer Among Civilians Working With the Military in Iraq and Afghanistan

• Author: Ryan Kelty,Alex Bierman
• DOI: 10.1177/0095327X17707203
• Published date: 01 April 2018
• Date: 01 April 2018
• Subject Matter: Articles

Article

Subjective Cohesion as

Stress Buffer Among

Civilians Working With

the Military in Iraq

and Afghanistan

Alex Bierman

1

and Ryan Kelty

2

Abstract

Recent research shows that civilians who work with the military in war zones are

often exposed to life-threatening situations that can create psychological distress. In

this study, we examine whether cohesion buffers the relationship between threat

and psychological distress. Using a probability sample of civilians working with the

U.S. Army in Iraq and Afghanistan, we find that cohesion buffers the relationship

between threat and both internalizing and externalizing forms of emotional distress,

but does so nonlinearly, with buffering observed at moderate but not high levels of

cohesion. This research shows that cohesion may be an important resource for the

mental health of civilians working in war zones but also supports sociological theory

positing that the utility of social resources for individual well-being may be obviated

in tightly integrative social contexts.

Keywords

cohesion, stress, mental health, deployed, civilians, military, war

1

Department of Sociology, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada

2

Department of Behavioral Sciences & Leadership, United States Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs,

CO, USA

Corresponding Author:

Ryan Kelty, Department of Behavioral Sciences & Leadership, United States Air Force Academy,

Colorado Springs, CO 80840, USA.

Email: ryan.kelty@usafa.edu

Armed Forces & Society

2018, Vol. 44(2) 238-260

ªThe Author(s) 2017

Reprints and permission:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/0095327X17707203

journals.sagepub.com/home/afs

This study examines whether cohesion helps weaken the association between

exposure to life-threatening situations and psychological distress in Department of

Army Civilians (DACs) working in Iraq and Afghanistan. Identifying resources that

aid the mental health of individuals working in war zones became increasingly more

important throughout the last decade, as the United States engaged in military

conflicts as a part of the “Global War on Terror.” The two most prominent compo-

nents of these efforts were Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) and Operation Iraqi

Freedom (OIF). OEF comprised military efforts in Afghanistan, while OIF involved

military efforts in Iraq and surrounding areas. Research has examined how the

mental health of members of the military may be affected by participation in these

engagements (e.g., Booth-Kewley et al., 2013; Hoge et al., 2004), but far less

attention has been paid to deployed civilians who often work alongside of members

of the military in areas of active hostilities.

A lack of attentionto civilians is surprising becausecivilians form a vital part of the

U.S. military effort. At the time data for this study were obtained, it is estimated that

over 6,000 U.S. civilians were serving in theater supporting OEF and OIF, as part of

approximately a quarter million civilians working for the Department of the Army

domestically and abroad (U.S. Department of the Army,2010). The U.S. Department

of Defense nowofficially refers to civiliansworking for and with the military as “force

multipliers,” which recognizes the essential contributions of civilians in completing

military missions, and thousands of civilians were deployed along with military per-

sonnel as a part of OEF and OIF (Department ofDefense,2010a; Quadrennial Defense

Review, 2014; U.S. Department of the Army, 2010). There are several different

categories of civilians included inthe total force. This study uses a sample of fe deral

civilians who are employed by the Department of the Army as federal employees.

These civilians range in skills from administrative support to highly skilled tech-

nicians, and importantly, they are not permitted to carry weapons. The second

main category of civilians in the total force includes contractors (i.e., nonfederal

employees). Within the contractor status, civilians represent the full spectrum from

maintenance, to technicians, to truck drivers, and to themorekineticarmedprivate

military security personnel who carry weapons. Beyond U.S. civilians, the

American military also employs host country nationals (e.g., base security, inter-

preters, intelligence gathering) from the countries where our overseas bases are

located. The U.S. military also employs third country nationals who are brought to

American bases from countries outside the one in which the base resides to per-

form routine base logistics and support (e.g., food service, laundry, and cleaning).

Combat roles are designated to a few specializations (i.e., infantry, armor, air

combat, and field artillery)—all wi thin the uniformed military. The mino rity of

civilians who do carry weapons are, by law, not allowed to engage in offensive

combat action. Rather they may only use their weapons in a defensive nature.

Moreover, the threats present in contemporary war zones can influence civilians

(and military personnel) who are not directly in combat or combat specializations

because the nature of modern “asymmetric warfare” involves weapons which can be

Bierman and Kelty 239