Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
Human Behavior in Military Contexts
HUMAN BEHAVIOR IN MILITARY CONTEXTS
Committee on Opportunities in Basic Research in the Behavioral and Social Sciences for the U.S. Military
James J. Blascovich and Christine R. Hartel, Editors
Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences
Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, D.C.
www.nap.edu
OCR for page R2
Human Behavior in Military Contexts
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This study was supported by Contract No. W74V8H-05-C-0050 between the National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Department of the Army. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-11230-7
Library of Congress Control Number-10: 0-309-11230-3
Additional copies of this report are available from
National Academies Press,
500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu
Printed in the United States of America.
Copyright 2008 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Cover credit: Photograph from Getty Images, U.S. Marines Encounter Demonstration in Al Kūt, Iraq, by photographer Chris Hondros.
Suggested citation: National Research Council. (2008). Human Behavior in Military Contexts. Committee on Opportunities in Basic Research in the Behavioral and Social Sciences for the U.S. Military. James J. Blascovich and Christine R. Hartel, Editors. Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
OCR for page R3
Human Behavior in Military Contexts
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.
www.national-academies.org
OCR for page R4
Human Behavior in Military Contexts
This page intentionally left blank.
OCR for page R5
Human Behavior in Military Contexts
COMMITTEE ON OPPORTUNITIES IN BASIC RESEARCH IN THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES FOR THE U.S. MILITARY
JAMES J. BLASCOVICH (Chair),
Department of Psychology, University of California, Santa Barbara
MARTIN M. CHEMERS,
Department of Psychology, University of California, Santa Cruz
JONATHAN GRATCH,
Department of Computer Science, University of Southern California
EARL HUNT,
Department of Psychology, University of Washington
DANIEL R. ILGEN,
Department of Psychology, Michigan State University
RANDY L. LARSEN,
Department of Psychology, Washington University
RICHARD E. MAYER,
Department of Psychology, University of California, Santa Barbara
HAROLD O’NEIL, JR.,
Rossier School of Education, University of Southern California
ALAN J. MCLAUGHLIN,*
Lincoln Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
VIMLA L. PATEL,
Department of Biomedical Informatics, Arizona State University
MIGUEL A. QUIÑONES,
Cox School of Business, Southern Methodist University
ANNA SIMONS,**
Center on Terrorism and Irregular Warfare, Naval Postgraduate School
CHRISTINE R. HARTEL, Study Director
JANET E. GARTON, Study Director (through July 2006)
MATTHEW D. MCDONOUGH, Senior Program Assistant
*
Resigned, November 2006
**
Resigned, October 2006
OCR for page R6
Human Behavior in Military Contexts
BOARD ON BEHAVIORAL, COGNITIVE, AND SENSORY SCIENCES
PHILIP E. RUBIN (Chair),
Haskins Laboratories and Department of Surgery, Yale University
LINDA M. BARTOSHUK,
Department of Psychology, University of Florida
SUSAN E. CAREY,
Department of Psychology, Harvard University
JOHN A. FEREJOHN,
Hoover Institution, Stanford University
MARTIN FISHBEIN,
Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania
LILA R. GLEITMAN,
Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania
ARIE W. KRUGLANSKI,
Department of Psychology, University of Maryland
RICHARD E. NISBETT,
Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
VALERIE F. REYNA,
Department of Human Development, Cornell University
LISA M. SAVAGE,
Department of Psychology, State University of New York, Binghamton
BRIAN A. WANDELL,
Department of Psychology, Stanford University
J. FRANK YATES,
Judgment and Decision Laboratory, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
CHRISTINE R. HARTEL, Director
OCR for page R7
Human Behavior in Military Contexts
Preface
Late in 2005, staff of the Research and Advanced Concepts Office of the U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) asked the National Research Council (NRC) to explore research opportunities in the basic behavioral and social sciences in order to assist ARI in developing a long-term research agenda in these areas. The NRC, through the Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences, created the Committee on Opportunities in Basic Research in the Behavioral and Social Sciences for the U.S. Military to undertake this task.
On behalf of the committee, I would like to express my appreciation to the many people who contributed to this project. The lead contact at ARI, Paul Gade, provided guidance and enthusiastic support for the project. Ably assisting him—and the committee—were Peter Legree and Jonathan Kaplan.
Members of the study committee, volunteers selected from many academic specialties and several having extensive experience in research for the military, found the project an interesting and stimulating opportunity for interdisciplinary collaboration. They cooperated in work groups, learned each other’s technical languages, and exemplified in their work the collegial qualities that are among the National Academies’ unique strengths. The Academies are grateful to them for their hard work, expertise, and good humor.
The committee held three meetings, at which it identified a variety of possible research opportunities in the behavioral sciences and considered the promise of each. As the committee considered priorities, it invited the input of a number of other specialists in vital research areas at a commit-
OCR for page R8
Human Behavior in Military Contexts
tee-sponsored workshop in October 2006. This workshop made possible an even deeper discussion of the promising areas of opportunity. Through such consultation and private deliberation, the committee arrived at a consensus on recommendations to ARI. The committee believes it has identified key areas of research that, with additional investment, will yield useful results for the U.S. military. Those investments will also reveal enormous potential of behavioral and social research to meet military needs.
The committee owes special thanks to several experts from outside the committee who prepared papers that were especially valuable: Lisa Feldman Barrett, Boston College; Michele Gelfand, University of Maryland; Arthur Graesser and Brandon King, The University of Memphis; Todd Heatherton, Anne C. Krendl, and Dylan D. Wagner, Dartmouth College; Nicole Krämer, University Duisburg-Essen; Judith Kroll, Pennsylvania State University; and Jiajie Zhang, University of Texas, Houston. The commissioned papers, which were presented at the committee’s workshop, provided detailed accounts of the current state of research in fields that the committee thought would be likely to lead to exciting advances in knowledge and have possible applications to military needs.
The second part of this report consists of six of those papers. Although they are not the work of the committee, we consider them to be useful aids in our consideration of investments for the U.S. military’s research portfolio. The papers represent the opinions of their authors, and they do not necessarily map directly onto either the recommendations or the research areas recommended by the committee.
We also benefited considerably from the presentations and comments at the workshop of several other experts: Robert Atkinson, Arizona State University; Heidi Byrnes, Georgetown University; Turhan Canli, State University of New York at Stony Brook; Peter Carnevale, New York University; Gerald Clore, University of Virginia; Catherine Cramton, George Mason University; and Marianne LaFrance, Yale University. All of them contributed to the committee’s thinking in important ways, and we thank them.
At the NRC, Janet Garton was the study director for the first 8 months, getting the study off to a very successful start. Subsequently, Christine R. Hartel, director of the Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences, took over as study director. In both roles, she provided critical expertise and guidance for the project. Senior program assistant Matthew D. McDonough provided skillful administrative and logistic support over the course of the project. Donna L. Randall saw to it that every organizational requirement was fulfilled. Julie Schuck and Matthew Von Hendy assisted with research for the report; Kristen A. Butler helped out in many emergencies. The executive office reports staff of the Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, especially Eugenia Grohman and Yvonne
OCR for page R9
Human Behavior in Military Contexts
Wise, provided invaluable help with editing and production of the report. Kirsten Sampson-Snyder managed the report review process.
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the NRC’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Robert Atkinson, Division of Psychology in Education, Arizona State University; Richard Brislin, Shidler College of Business, University of Hawaii; Keith Brown, Watson Institute for International Studies, Brown University; Susan T. Fiske, Department of Psychology, Princeton University; Larry G. Lehowicz, Experimentation, Test and Training Sector Group, Quantum Research International, Arlington, VA; Alan M. Lesgold, School of Education, University of Pittsburgh; Kevin R. Murphy, Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University; and William Revelle, Department of Psychology, Northwestern University.
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Neil J. Smelser, University of California, Berkeley. Appointed by the NRC, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.
James J. Blascovich, Chair
Committee on Opportunities in Basic Research in the Behavioral and Social Sciences for the U.S. Military
OCR for page R10
Human Behavior in Military Contexts
This page intentionally left blank.
OCR for page R11
Human Behavior in Military Contexts
Contents
Executive Summary
1
PART I: COMMITTEE REPORT
1
Overview
7
2
Intercultural Competence
20
3
Teams in Complex Environments
29
4
Technology and Training
39
5
Nonverbal Communication
46
6
Emotion
55
7
Behavioral Neurophysiology
64
References
70
OCR for page R12
Human Behavior in Military Contexts
PART II: PAPERS
Culture and Negotiations
Michele J. Gelfand
85
Adult Second Language Acquisition: A Cognitive Science Perspective
Judith F. Kroll
106
Technology-Based Training
Arthur C. Graesser and Brandon King
127
Nonverbal Communication
Nicole C. Krämer
150
The Science of Emotion: What People Believe, What the Evidence Shows, and Where to Go from Here
Lisa Feldman Barrett
189
Neurophysiological Approaches to Understanding Behavior
Todd F. Heatherton, Anne C. Krendl, and Dylan D. Wagner
217
