• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
 
regimental unit replacement personnel transfer poli-cies whereby a whole military unit’s personnel, anddependent families, relocate together as a group fromone military assignment to another; and (e) making itmandatory for military personnel to subject them-selves to inoculations, experimental drugs and thera-peutics, or, owing to insufficient supplies, withholdingdrug treatments for some personnel.Military psychologists, therefore, have the oppor-tunity to participate in the enactment of social andorganizational change in the military, and their workcanhavefar-reachingimplicationsforsocietyatlarge.
See also
: Engineering Psychology; Military and Dis-aster Psychiatry
Bibliography
Crawford M P 1970 Military psychology and general psycho-logy.
American Psychologist
25
: 328–36CroninC(ed.)1998
MilitaryPsychology:anIntroduction
.Simonand Schuster, Needham Heights, MAGal R, Mangelsdorff A D (eds.) 1991
Handbook of MilitaryPsychology
. Wiley, Chichester, UKGlenn J F, Burr R E, Hubbard R W, Mays M Z, Moore R J,Jones B H, Krueger G P (eds.) 1991
Sustaining Health and Performance in the Desert: En
ironmental Medicine Guidance for Operations in Southwest Asia
. USARIEM Technical NoteNos. 91-1 and 91-2, pocket version. DTIC Nos. AD: A229-643 and AD: A229-846. US Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, Natick, MAJohnson E 1991 Foreword In: Gal R, Mangelsdorff A D (eds.)
Handbook of Military Psychology
.Wiley,Chichester,UK,pp.xxi–xxivKrueger G P 1991 Introduction of section 3: EnvironmentalfactorsandmilitaryperspectivesIn:GalR,MangelsdorffA D(eds.)
Handbook of Military Psychology
. Wiley, Chichester,UK, pp. 211–13Krueger G P 1998 Military performance under adverse con-ditions In: Cronin C (ed.)
Military Psychology: An Intro
-
duction
. Simon and Schuster, Needham Heights, MA, pp.88–111Krueger GP 2000 Military culture. In: Kazdin A E (ed.)
Encyclopedia of Psychology
. American Psychological Asso-ciation, Washington, DC and Oxford University Press, NewYork, Vol. 5, pp. 252–59Krueger G P, Banderet L E 1997 Effects of chemical protectiveclothing on military performance: a review of the issues.
Military Psychology
9
: 255–86MangelsdorffA D2000Militarypsychology:historyofthefield.In: Kazdin A E (ed.)
Encyclopedia of Psychology
. AmericanPsychological Association, Washington, DC and OxfordUniversity Press, New York, Vol. 5, pp. 259–63Parsons H M 1972
Man–Machine System Experiments
. JohnsHopkins Press, Baltimore, MDStouffer S A, LumsdaineA A, Lumsdaine M H,Williams R M,Smith M B, Janis I L, Star S A, Cottrell L S 1949
TheAmerican Soldier: Combat and Its Aftermath
. PrincetonUniversity Press, Princeton, NJ, Vol. IITaylor H L Alluisi E A 1994 Military psychology. In: Rama-chandran V S (ed.)
Encyclopedia of Human Beha
ior
. Aca-demic Press, New York, Vol. 3, pp. 191–201Uhlaner J E 1968
The Research Psychologist in the Army—1917 to 1967 
. US Army Behavioral Science Research LaboratoryTechnical Research Report No. 1155, US Army BehavioralScience Research Laboratory, Arlington, VAWiskoff M F (ed.) 1988–99
Military Psychology: The Official Journal of the Di 
ision of Military Psychology, AmericanPsychological Association
. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJWiskoffM F 1997Defense of the nation:military psychologists.In: Sternberg R J (ed.)
Career Paths in Psychology: WhereYour Degree Can Take You
. American Psychological As-sociation, Washington, DC, Chap. 13, pp. 245–68Zinchenko V, Munipov V 1989
Fundamentals of Ergonomics
.Progress, Moscow
G. P. Krueger
Military Sociology
The study of armed forces is somewhat of an anomalyin the sociological discipline. Although possessing anextensive and cumulative literature, the sociology of the military is rarely included in the university cur-riculum. Moreover, discipline boundaries for studentsof the armed forces have been exceptionally per-meable. Sociologists of the armed forces have longreliedontheworkofotherstudentsofmilitaryinsuchallied disciplines as political science, psychology, andhistory. In recent years, there has been an increasingoverlap with peace studies and national securitystudies. Beyond academia there is a larger group—variously, present and past members of the military,defenders and critics of military organization, and journalists—who both give insights and serve as acorrective for professional sociologists of the military.Indeed, few substantiveareas insociology havesuch adiffuse and broad constituency as does the study of armed forces and society.Onereadilyobservedtrendinthesociologicalstudyofmilitaryphenomenais its wideningpurview. Whereearlier accounts saw the military as a self-containedorganizational entity, contemporary accounts regardthe military and civilian spheres as interactive. Thesense of the broadened scope is captured in thecontemporary preference for the term ‘armed forcesand society’ with its more inclusive connotations, asopposed to the more delimited ‘military sociology.’Preciselybecausethestudyofarmedforcesandsocietyhas become so overarching, it is convenient to presentthe extant literature by discrete topical constructs: (a)the professional soldier; (b) the combat soldier; (c) thecommon soldier; (d) the citizen soldier; and (e) organ-izational change.
1. The Professional Soldier
The basic referents for discussion of military pro-fessionalism are to be found in two landmark studiesthat first appeared in the interwar years betweenKorea and Vietnam. Samuel P. Huntington,
The
9873
Military Sociology
 
Soldier and the State
(1957), and Morris Janowitz,
The Professional Soldier
(1960), shared a commonperspective in that they eschewed negative stereotypesof the military officer. This was in contrast to thecontemporaneous thesis of C. Wright Mills (1956)characterizing military leaders as ‘warlords’ wieldingenormous influence in the ‘power elite.’Huntington and Janowitz also agreed that thecomplexities of modern warfare and internationalpolices required new formulation of military officer-ship. They differed, however, in their conceptual andprogrammatic portrayal of modern military profes-sionalism. For Huntington, military efficiency andpolitical neutrality require a form of insulation fromthe values of the larger and more liberal society.Janowitz, on the other hand, proposes that militaryprofessionalismshouldberesponsive to,but not over-whelmed by, external conditions such as managerialskills, civilian educational influences, and emergentsocial forces. Subsequent studies of the professionalofficer have been strongly influenced by these con-trasting ideal types.A hardy perennial in the professional soldier litera-ture has been the examination of the social origins of career officers and socialization at military academies.Research on this subject has been as notable inEuropean military sociology as in the USA. Thegeneral conclusion is that professional self-definitionsaremuchmoreshapedbyanticipatoryandconcurrentsocialization than by social background variables.IntheUSA,mediaattentionin1999wasfocusedonstudies that presented evidence of a ‘civil-militarygap.’ The overall finding was one of a growing socialconservatism within the officer corps that was in-creasingly alienated from the social values of thelarger society (Feaver and Kohn 1999). At the sametime, however, public opinion surveys reported thatthearmed forceswereaccordedthehighest evaluationamong US institutions.If research on military professionalism in the USA,WesternEurope,andotheradvanceddemocracieswasbecoming more notable in the contemporary period,studies of military officers in other areas followed adifferent pattern. During the 1970s the literature onthe military in Third World countries was quiteextensive, but has since declined. The literature onmilitary officers in underdeveloped areas was markedby two quite opposing schools, one seeing the armedforces as ‘moderinizers,’ the other as ‘praetorians.’
2. The Combat Soldier
Any discussion of the combat soldier must use as abenchmark the surveys of World War II reported inthe volumes of 
The American Soldier
by SamuelStoufferandhisassociates(1949Vol.II).Thesestudiesreveal a profoundly nonideological soldier. The keyexplanation of combat motivation was seen as afunction of the soldier’s solidarity and social cohesionwith fellow soldiers at small group levels. Shils andJanowitz (1948) reported similar findings based oninterviews with German prisoners of war. The over-riding salience of the primary group became anaccepted tenet of military sociology.Moskos’(1970)observationsofUScombatsoldiersin Vietnam, however, indicated that the concept of primarygroupshadlimitations.ThecombatsoldierinVietnam had a more privatized view of the warfosteredbytheone-yearrotationsystemincontrasttohis World War II counterpart who was in the war forthe duration. Moskos’ Vietnam research, moreover,found that although the US soldiers had a generalaversion to overt patriotic appeals, this should notobscure underlying beliefs as to the war’s legitimacy,or ‘latent ideology,’ as a factor affecting combatperformance and commitment.The increasing use of armed forces in peacekeepingmissions starting in the 1990s has focused attentionon the contrast between soldiers as ‘warriors’ or‘humanitarians.’ One the one hand, the conventionalwisdom is that ‘operations other than war’ underminecombat effectiveness. Field research, however, indi-catesthatmanysoldiersthemselvesviewpeacekeepingas conducive to overall military effectiveness (Miller1997). In any event, the peacekeeping literature hasbecome another genre in military sociology, replacingto a major extent the earlier interest on the combatsoldier. Much of this was anticipated by Janowitz’s(1960) earlier formulation of the emerging ‘con-stabulary’ role of the military.
3. The Common or Enlisted Soldier
The benchmark referent for any discussion of thecommon or enlisted soldier (‘other ranks’ in Britishterminology) is again the volumes of 
The AmericanSoldier
(Stouffer et al. 1949, Vol. I). Never before orsince have so many aspects of military life been sosystematically studied. These materials largely re-volved around the enlisted culture and race relationsaswellascombatmotivation.Theseissuescontinuetointerest military sociologists, with the more recenttopical additions of gender and sexual orientation. Alacuna in the military sociology of enlisted personnelhasbeenthenearabsenceofstudiesofsailors,airmen,or marines.The overriding finding of 
The American Soldier
(Stouffer et al. 1949, Vol II) was the pervasiveenlisted resentment toward the privileged status of officers. The centrality of the enlisted–officer cleavagewas further corroborated by other sociologists, whodescribed the military from the vantage of active-dutyparticipation in World War II. Starting in the ColdWar period, another distinction in the military struc-ture appeared. The college-educated draftee is de-scribedasfarmorealienatedfromhisenlistedpeersof 9874
Military Sociology
 
lower socioeconomic background than he is fromofficers with whom he shares a similar class back-ground. In the Vietnam War, the most significantcleavage was between single-term servicemen andcareer servicemen, cutting across ranks (Moskos1970). In the post-Cold War era, yet another cleavagehas appeared, that between soldiers serving in combatunits and those in support units.Oneofthemostcelebratedfindingsof 
TheAmericanSoldier
was the discovery that the more contact whitesoldiershadwithblacktroops,themorefavorablewastheir reaction toward racial integration (Stouffer et al.1949,Vol.II).Suchsocialsciencefindingswereusedtobuttress the arguments that led to the abolishment of racial segregation in the armed forces. By the early1950s this integration was an accomplished fact,resulting in a far-reaching transformation of a majorUS institution. Following ups and downs in racerelationsduringthe1960sand1970s,thearmedforcesbythe1990swereviewedasmodelforblackleadershipin a racially integrated institution. One key finding,however, was that blacks consistently take a morenegative view of race relations than do whites.Ifracerelations,relativelyspeaking,werepositiveinthe armed forces, the interactions between men andwomen were viewed as more problematic. By the1990s, the role of women had greatly expanded in theUS armed forces to the point where women were innearly all positions excepting direct ground combat.Much public and media attention was focused onrecurrent scandals involving sexual harassment andadultery in the military. Indeed, between 1995 and2000 more books were written on gender than on anyothertopicinthearmedforces.Onekeyfindingisthatenlistedwomenandwomenofficerswerenotinaccordon the role of females in the armed forces, the formerfavoring a more limited role than the latter (Miller1998).
4. The Citizen Soldier
ArunningthemeinAmericanmilitarylifehasbeenthe juxtapositionoftheprofessionalsoldierandthecitizensoldier.Thenotionofthecitizensoldierraisesthetwinissuesoftheextenttowhichmilitarylifeaffectsciviliansensibilities of noncareer soldiers and civilian inputaffects the military system. Although topics such asreserveforces andofficer trainingprograms on collegecampuses are directly related to the concept of thecitizen soldier, these topics have not been objects of major research by military sociologists.The controversies over conscription during theVietnam War did relate conceptual issues and em-pirical findings to the sociology of the citizen soldier.Even with the end of the draft in 1973, sociologicalinterest in the citizen soldier remained strong (Segal1989).Thepolicydebateontheall-volunteerforceandmilitary recruitment has largely become one betweensociologists and economists.
5. Organizational Change
A major paradigm for understanding change in themilitary organization is the institutional–occupationthesis(MoskosandWood1988).Whereaninstitutionis legitimated in terms of values and norms, anoccupation is based on the marketplace economy.In an institution, role commitments tend to bediffuse, reference groups are ‘vertical’ (i.e., within theorganization), and compensation is based on rankand seniority. In an occupation, role commitmentstend to be specific, reference groups are ‘horizontal’(i.e., with like workers external to the organization),and compensation is based on skill level and labormarket considerations. An ideal type formulation, the‘I
\
O’ thesis has served as a basis for much subsequentresearchinWesternmilitarysystemsoutsidetheUSA.The overarching thesis is that contemporary militaryorganizations are moving away from an institutionalformattoonemoreresemblingthatofanoccupationalone.In the wake of the end of the Cold War, even moremomentouschangesareoccurringwithinarmedforcesof Western societies. The modern military thatemergedinthenineteenthcenturywas associatedwiththe rise of the nation-state. It was a conscripted massarmy, war-oriented in mission, masculine in makeupand ethos, and sharply differentiated in structure andculture from civilian society. The ‘postmodern’ mili-tary,bycontrast,loosensthetieswiththenation-state,becomesmultipurposeinmission,andmovestowardasmallervolunteerforce.Itisincreasinglyandrogynousin makeup and ethos and has a greater permeabilitywith civilian society (Moskos et al. 2000).At the turn of the new century, military sociologyhas yet to find a significant niche within the academiccommunity. Yet military sociologists are increasinglybeing noted by the media and policy makers.
See also
: Cold War, The; Military and DisasterPsychiatry; Military and Politics; Military History;Military Psychology: United States; Police, Sociologyof; Professionalization
\
Professions in History; Pro-fessions, Sociology of; Racial Relations; Violence:Public; War: Anthropological Aspects; War, Socio-logy of 
Bibliography
Feaver P D, Kohn R H 1999
Project on the Gap Between theMilitary and Ci 
ilian Society
. Triangle Institute for SecurityStudies, Durham, NCHuntingtonS P1957
The Soldier and the State
.BelknapPressof Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAJanowitz M 1960
The Professional Soldier
. Free Press, Glencoe,ILMiller L L 1997 Do soldiers hate peacekeeping?
Armed Forcesand Society
23
: 415–50Miller L L 1998 Feminism and the exclusion of army womenfrom combat.
Gender Issues
16
: 333–64
9875
Military Sociology
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...