Lessons Learned From Implementing an App-Based Resilience Training Program in a Naval Operational Setting
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background Enhancing resilience and reducing stress are critical to increasing the readiness and performance of military personnel in operational settings. Stress and resilience programs can improve service members’ ability to manage their stress during both normal and extreme operational conditions, and have the potential to enhance safety at sea. Implementing an efficient and effective application-based training program in a military setting has unique challenges, including minimizing intrusion on the command’s training time and technological considerations (eg, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth technology restrictions). Objective An enhanced version of a training program called the Stress Resilience Training System (SRTS) was implemented into the operating environment of a naval vessel. The system contains an in-person workshop, regular mentoring in resilience-building techniques, and an iPad-based app used for biofeedback of heart rate variability coherence and training support. This work describes the lessons learned from the implementation process of the app component of the program, based on responses from active duty service members. Methods Crew members aboard a Navy vessel (N=92) volunteered to participate in the evaluation of the 10-week program. All ship personnel were provided with an initial 2.5-hour workshop, mentorship, and iPads containing the SRTS app to use for the duration of the 10-week program. Participants rated different components of the training, and their app usage during the course of the study was recorded. Results Participants somewhat agreed that the app was appropriate for military service members (mean 2.51, SD 1.14; response options 0=strongly disagree to 4=strongly agree for all ratings) and were somewhat likely to recommend the app to fellow service members (mean 2.53, SD 1.03). Ratings of the workshop’s relevance to military readiness (mean 2.68, SD 0.95) and of the instructors’ credibility (mean 3.22, SD 0.92) were higher than ratings of the app. Additionally, usage of the app was low and highly variable (mean 42.26, SD 60.53; range 0 to 312.54 minutes). Anecdotal evidence provided by crewmembers suggested that using the app on an iPad was cumbersome and that the Wi-Fi was often inaccessible, making the iPad a less valuable tool overall. Conclusions This implementation of the app component of SRTS raised questions regarding the suitability of the technological format for this operational setting. User ratings and participant comments suggested that the technology was not the most successful component of the program. The implementation in the iPad format was not conducive to the operational setting and the inconvenience of this format may have deterred participants from using it in settings where a personal or more compact device may have been more appropriate. Recommendations going forward include making the app component available for use on smartphones operating on both iOS and Android platforms to make it user friendly, accessible, and more engaging, which, in turn, is expected to increase usage and uptake of the program’s techniques. Furthermore, incorporating more engaging content, gamification, and tracking and reporting user progress into the overall app may enhance motivation to use more components of the app and increase usage, ultimately enhancing its impact on resilience.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».