4.3 Article

Resilience as a Protective Factor in Basic Military Training, a Longitudinal Study of the Swiss Armed Forces

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18116077

关键词

resilience; perceived stress; mental distress; dropout; performance

资金

  1. Swiss Federal Department of Defense, Civil Protection and Sport (DDPS)
  2. Military Academy of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology ETH Zurich, Switzerland

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that recruits with higher resilience scores were more likely to reduce perceived stress and psychological distress during military training, achieving better military performance. However, there were no differences in resilience scores, perceived stress, and psychological distress between recruits who continued training and dropouts.
For recruits, basic military training (BMT) can be experienced as a stressful episode in which relevant protective factors such as resilience might be essential for successful completion of the training. The present study examined whether resilience would act as a protective factor during BMT in the Swiss Armed Forces. To this end, we conducted a cross-sectional and longitudinal study of resilience and psychological burden. At the beginning of the BMT and at week 11, 525 male recruits (mean age: 20.3 years) completed a series of questionnaires covering demographic information and assessing resilience, perceived stress and mental distress. In parallel, their superiors rated recruits' military performance in week 13. Dropout rates were also registered. Cross-sectionally and longitudinally, higher resilience scores predicted lower scores for perceived stress, mental distress, and better military performance. Higher self-rated resilience was moderately associated with military performance, as rated by recruits' superiors. Resilience scores, perceived stress and mental distress did not differ between those recruits continuing their BMT and dropouts. In support of our assumptions, resilience acted as a protective factor during Swiss Armed Forces BMT.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据