Search

The purpose of this study is to develop a better understanding of resilience in U.S. Navy recruits as they go through basic training. We seek to examine factors that contribute to higher or lower levels of resiliency. This study surveyed 299 U.S. Navy recruits to measure resilience and its constructs at four time intervals to examine relationships, trends, and any significant changes. This project used quantitative analysis techniques to surface factors relevant to increasing resiliency. Our results provide insight to increases in resilience trends and a path model, which investigates causation. Resilience trends demonstrate the possibility to increase resilience capacity through external factors. The important takeaway is we believe results further affirm that resilience may be learned and is not entirely a personality trait. Additionally, a path model found leadership moderated through cohesion and identification can positively impact division resilience. Our results also provide insight for recommended interventions that will focus on leadership, cohesion, and positive framing to increase the resilience capacity of new recruits. We feel that building resilience is essential to producing Sailors that are always ready to execute the Navy’s mission.

We provide an overview of social network analysis focusing on network advantage as a lens that touches on much of the area. For reasons of good data and abundant research, we draw heavily on studies of people in organizations. Advantage is traced to network structure as a proxy for the distribution of variably sticky information in a population. The network around a person indicates the person's access and control in the distribution. Advantage is a function of information breadth, timing, and arbitrage. Advantage is manifest in higher odds of proposing good ideas, more positive evaluations and recognition, higher compensation, and faster promotions. We discuss frontiers of advantage contingent on personality, cognition, embeddedness, and dynamics.

We investigated the effects of awareness on selective attention for masked and unmasked verbal threat material using a computerised version of the emotional Stroop. Participants were assigned to the high trait anxious (HTA) and low trait anxious (LTA) groups on the basis of questionnaire scores, and state anxiety was manipulated within participants through the threat of electric shock. To investigate the effects of awareness on responses to threat, the mode of exposure was blocked such that half the participants received masked trials before the unmasked trials, whereas the other half received the reverse order. The results revealed that there was no difference between the HTA and LTA groups in responses to threat for those who received the masked trials before the unmasked trials. However, when unmasked trials were presented before the masked trials HTA individuals were significantly slower to respond to both masked and unmasked threat words compared to the LTA group, and these effects were not further modified by participants' state anxiety status. The results are discussed in terms of the automatic nature of threat processing in anxiety.

We investigated selective attention for masked and unmasked, threat, and positively valenced words, in high trait anxious (HTA) and low trait anxious (LTA) individuals using the emotional Stroop colour-naming task. State anxiety was varied within participants through the threat of electric shock. To investigate whether the sequencing of the state anxiety manipulation affected colour-naming latencies, the ordering of the shock threat and shock safe conditions was counterbalanced across participants. The results indicated that the ordering of the state anxiety manipulation moderated masked and unmasked threat bias effects. Specifically, relative to LTA individuals, HTA individuals showed a threat interference effect, but this effect was limited to those who performed under the threat of shock in the later stages of the experiment. Irrespective of exposure mode and state anxiety status, all individuals showed interference for threat in the early stages of the experiment, relative to a threat facilitation effect in the later stages of the experiment. For the unmasked trials alone, the data also revealed a significant threat interference effect for the HTA group relative to the LTA group in the shock threat condition, and this effect was evident irrespective of shock threat order. The results are discussed with respect to the automatic nature of emotional processing in anxiety.