Cohesion, the Human Element in Combat

Henderson, W.

doi:10.21236/ada163362

Cited by 88 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, propinquity (spatial and temporal proximity) and group membership can lead individuals to feel closer to others in the group than to those outside of it (Zajonc, 1968;Brewer, 1979;Gaertner et al, 1993). Strong leadership (Henderson, 1985(Henderson, , 1990, small group size (Hogg, 1992;Mullen and Cooper, 1993), experience of success (Lott and Lott, 1965), and shared threat (Johnson et al, 1981;Johnson, Johnson, and Maruyama, 1984) may also contribute to strong group cohesion. On the other hand, group turnover and turbulence may weaken cohesion (Henderson, 1985(Henderson, , 1990.…”

Section: Small-group Dynamics and Cohesionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Strong leadership (Henderson, 1985(Henderson, , 1990, small group size (Hogg, 1992;Mullen and Cooper, 1993), experience of success (Lott and Lott, 1965), and shared threat (Johnson et al, 1981;Johnson, Johnson, and Maruyama, 1984) may also contribute to strong group cohesion. On the other hand, group turnover and turbulence may weaken cohesion (Henderson, 1985(Henderson, , 1990. 10 ____________ Cohesion may affect group performance and morale.…”

Section: Small-group Dynamics and Cohesionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To this list, Kellet (1982) adds the perception of an external threat by the soldier to himself or something he values highly (homeland or family). Several studies have supported the argument that an individual's commitment to his unit or work group and his loyalty to his colleagues can provide combat motivation (Henderson, 1985;MacCoun, 1993;Moskos, 1970;Sarkesian, 1980;Shils and Janowitz, 1948). Furthermore, Moskos (1970) found that while overt ideological and patriotic motivations played a relatively small role in the combat motivations of the average soldier in his study, unstated beliefs about the legitimacy of the social system for which he is fighting did contribute to combat motivation, particularly to the extent that these beliefs were shared.…”

Section: Combat Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

How Deployments Affect Service Members

Hosek¹,

Kavanagh²,

Miller³

2006

PsycEXTRA Dataset

126

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Small-group Dynamics and Cohesionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Small-group Dynamics and Cohesionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Combat Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How Deployments Affect Service Members

Hosek¹,

Kavanagh²,

Miller³

2006

PsycEXTRA Dataset

126

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Unit cohesion has been extensively studied by researchers and scholars and the literature indicates that military unit cohesion is task oriented rather than socially focused, thus the members are committed to achieving a shared goal, not concerned with liking each other (Henderson, 1985;Kier 1998;Segal & Kestnbaum, 2002;Wong, Kolditz, Millen, & Potter, 2003). Even when military units have openly gay service members, there have been no negative reports related to unit cohesion (Berube, 1990;Osburn, 1995).…”

Section: Rationale For Homosexual Exclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Homosexuality and the Military: A Review of the Literature

Sinclair

2009

Journal of Homosexuality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In a military context, cohesion is the bonding of Soldiers together in order to sustain the warrior spirittheir morale, will to fight and commitment to each other, the unit, and mission accomplishment in combat or under the stress of other smaller contingency missions. 73 Like morale, esprit de corps is a dynamic relationship whose strength is dependent on many factors, morale being one. Trust and teamwork created by sustained formal and informal interaction through good training, common experiences, shared identity, symbols, and values builds unit cohesion.…”

Section: Esprit De Corps and Cohesionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The U.S. Army Study of the Human Dimension in the Future 2015-2024

2008

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. REPORT DATE APR 20082 Foreword From the Commanding General U.S. Army Training and Doctrine CommandIn August 2006, I directed a study to take a thoughtful and detailed look at what we are calling the Human Dimension. In looking to an uncertain future from 2015 to 2024, as we have in other concepts, we envision an increasingly complex future operating environment that will challenge individual Soldiers, their leaders, and their organizations in unprecedented ways. I wanted this study to serve as a point of departure for wide-ranging discussions, research, and investigations into the performance, reliability, flexibility, endurance, and adaptability of an Army made up of Soldiers, their families, civilians, and contractors.The Army cannot afford to focus only on current operations as a predictor of the future. It must prepare people so that future commanders can sustain operations in a time of persistent conflict. Approved Army concepts describe the employment of Soldiers in the future. The United States Army Study for the Human Dimension goes further to explore human factors in war across the range of military operations. This study reaches beyond the issues of equipping Soldiers with hardware tools of war into the more subtle moral-ethical, intellectual, and physical components of Soldier development. We will follow this study with a formal approved concept in the near future.The Army will always rely on an array of capabilities developed by other Services and the larger joint community in order to achieve its conceptual goals. Similarly, the entire joint force will regularly participate in multinational and interagency operations in the future. Thus, I strongly encourage the use of the Human Dimension study in our interactions with other Services and joint organizations, both to advance the intellectual dialogue regarding future operations and to strengthen the basis for defining future Army and joint requirements, in the spirit of joint interdependence. In the same vein, recognizing that the Army and the other services operate in support of the Nation, and that many of the required capabilities this study reveals are beyond the capability of the Department of Defense, I welcome and encourage comments fr...

show abstract

Cohesion, the Human Element in Combat

Cited by 88 publications

References 3 publications

How Deployments Affect Service Members

How Deployments Affect Service Members

Homosexuality and the Military: A Review of the Literature

The U.S. Army Study of the Human Dimension in the Future 2015-2024

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About