Initial Psychiatric Findings of Recently Repatriated Prisoners of War

Between a rock and a hard place: Self-concept regulating and communicative properties of distancing behaviors.

“…In light of these different perspectives on the relationship between how we act (the public self) and who we believe we are (the private self), it is not surprising that a great deal of research effort has been invested in examining the ways in which outward behavior affects private self-appraisals. For example, outward behavior has been shown to play an important role in the self-constructive dynamics of the self: Under a variety of circumstances people tend to internalize externally imposed roles (Frank & Gilovich, 1988;Janis, 1968;Janis & Mann, 1965;Lieberman, 1956;Mann & Janis, 1968), proattitudinal behaviors (Kiesler, 1971;Schlenker, 1982;Schlenker & Goldman, 1982), counterattitudinal statements (Cooper & Fazio, 1984;Festinger & Carlsmith, 1959;Wicklund & Brehm, 1976), self-presentations (Baumeister, 1982(Baumeister, ,1986Baumeister & Tice, 1984;Gergen, 1965;Jones, Rhodewalt, Berglas, & Skelton, 1981;Rhodewait & Agustsdottir, 1986;Schlenker & Trudeau, 1990;Upshaw & Yates, 1968), and political indoctrination or "brainwashing" (Hearst & Moscow, 1982;Schein, 1956;Schein, Schneier, & Barker, 1961;Segal, 1954).…”

Understanding the Pow Experience: Stress Research and the Implementation of the 1955 U.S. Armed Forces Code of Conduct

“…Using Bettelheim's study as a guide, social and behavioral scientists in the 1950s strove to understand how and why individuals in “extreme situations” broke down psychologically. For instance, Henry Segal, chief of the U.S. Army's Neuropsychiatric Evaluation Team, performed psychiatric evaluations on many American POWs, which confirmed Bettelheim's claims about the “effects of war imprisonment upon both the minds and bodies of men” (Segal, , p. 358). Contrary to reports in the press, Segal claimed that the Chinese had been ineffective in converting prisoners to communism but that they had been successful in creating an environment that produced “unceasing anxiety” (p. 363).…”

Psychiatry in the Korean War: Perils, PIES, and Prisoners of War

“…Thesesymptoms were sometimes attributed to brainwashing and moral weakness, not to chronicdisease and lack ofvitamins. [36][37][38]41,[47][48][49] The returning paws (3,323 Army personnel) were treated with suspicion and oftenhostility. Congress and the American publicwas concerned about both the possibility of past collaboration, accounts ofatrocities committed by Americans against their fellow prisoners, and the fear that the soldiers couldhave been brainwashed by the Chinese and stillbe spying forthem.…”

“…Congress and the American publicwas concerned about both the possibility of past collaboration, accounts ofatrocities committed by Americans against their fellow prisoners, and the fear that the soldiers couldhave been brainwashed by the Chinese and stillbe spying forthem. 48 Clearly some atrocities were committed, but the inclusion of collaborators in the initial "Little Switch" operation led to false Military Medicine, Vol. 167, November 2002 Psychiatry in the Korean War inflated reports."…”