MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292769136 · doi:10.1080/20008066.2022.2104007

Encountering children and child soldiers during military deployments: the impact and implications for moral injury

2022· review· en· W4292769136 on OpenAlexaff
Myriam Denov

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean journal of psychotraumatology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoral injuryShamePsychological interventionSoftware deploymentPsychologyService memberMilitary serviceMoral disengagementMilitary personnelSocial psychologyCriminologyPsychiatryLawPolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: During a deployment, soldiers must make seemingly impossible decisions, including having to engage with child soldiers. Such moral conflicts may continue to affect service members and veterans in the aftermath of a deployment, sometimes leading to severe moral distress, anguish, and personal crises. Service providers have increasingly argued that as a diagnosis, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) cannot account for these deeply personal and painful moral conflicts. In light of this, the concept of moral injury has been introduced to better capture the profound forms of guilt and shame that may be experienced by service members and veterans.Objective: This paper addresses encounters with children and child soldiers during military deployments, as well as the risk for moral injury during and following these encounters, and their implications. This exploratory paper brings together existing literature on the topic to introduce, illustrate, and offer potential and promising interventions.Results: Given the potential moral conflicts that may ensue, military personnel who encounter child soldiers during a military deployment may be at risk for moral injury during and following these encounters. The introduction of the concept of moral injury provides a way for these largely unnamed personal and painful moral conflicts and violations to be recognized, addressed, and with appropriate care, remedied. Although there is limited research into their effectiveness at treating moral injury, individual and group-based interventions have been identified as potentially beneficial.Conclusion: As encounters with children during deployments are likely to continue, systematic research, training, healing interventions and prevention strategies are vital to support and protect children in conflict settings, as well as to ensure the mental health and well-being of service members and veterans.HIGHLIGHTS Profound moral conflicts may affect service members and veterans in the aftermath of a military deployment, sometimes leading to severe moral distress, anguish, and personal crises. The concept of moral injury has been introduced to better capture the profound forms of guilt and shame that may be experienced by service members and veterans.Encountering children and child soldiers during a military deployment, may present unique challenges, stress, and moral crises leading to potentially moral injurious events. In particular, transgression-based events which result from an individual perpetrating or engaging in acts that contravene his or her deeply held moral beliefs and expectations such as harming children, and betrayal-based events, which results from witnessing or falling victim to the perceived moral transgressions of others, may lead to lasting psychological, biological, spiritual, behavioural and social impairments.Interventions applied in both an individual-based context such as Cognitive Processing Therapy, Impact of Killing, Adaptive Disclosure, and a group-based context such as Acceptance and Commitment Therapy and Resilience Strength Training, have been identified as potentially beneficial to addressing moral injury. However, more research is required to ascertain appropriate and effective intervention and healing strategies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.105
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.325 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean journal of psychotraumatologySame topicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207