Israeli Reservists’ Psychological Response to War May Depend on More Than Combat Exposure
A new study of Israeli reservists suggests that the psychological consequences of war may depend on more than the intensity of combat. Emotional insecurity and soldiers’ relationship with their political beliefs may also play a role in how they experience and recover from trauma.
Researchers examined 357 Israeli reserve soldiers who were mobilized and deployed during the first months following October 7. Their findings indicate an association between combat exposure and several psychological outcomes, including post-traumatic stress symptoms, depression and certain addictive behaviors.
According to the researchers, these effects appeared more pronounced among soldiers reporting higher levels of attachment anxiety or greater political disillusionment.
Trauma Extends Beyond the Battlefield
Attachment anxiety refers, among other things, to a heightened concern about rejection, self-worth and the stability of close relationships.
“We often think about trauma only as the result of what happens on the battlefield,” said Dr. Uri Lifshin, a researcher at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Israel Center for Addiction and Mental Health. “But our findings show that when soldiers feel insecure or disconnected from the social and political realities around them, they become much more vulnerable to severe psychological distress.”
Is There a Link to Politics?
The researchers also identified an association between certain political characteristics and levels of psychological distress.
Among soldiers who had been exposed to life-threatening situations and reported high attachment anxiety, those who had voted for the left-wing opposition party reported greater psychological distress than those whose political preferences were more aligned with the right-wing governing coalition.
The researchers interpret this finding through the concept of ideological stability. For some individuals, political beliefs may provide a framework for interpreting events, particularly during periods of crisis. When that framework is disrupted, it may become more difficult to regain a sense of control and coherence following a traumatic event.
The finding should nevertheless be interpreted with caution. The study identifies associations between different variables but does not, by itself, establish that a particular political orientation directly causes greater or lesser trauma.
The study also identified indirect links between combat exposure, emotional insecurity, political factors and several potentially problematic behaviors.
Researchers examined excessive alcohol consumption, cannabis use, gambling, pornography consumption and problematic video-game use.
According to their interpretation, such behaviors may function as avoidance or coping mechanisms, providing temporary relief from intrusive memories, anxiety and psychological distress.
The Importance of the Postwar Environment
The researchers emphasize the importance of looking beyond the battlefield when assessing the psychological consequences of military service.
Personal relationships, emotional security and the broader social environment in which soldiers return to civilian life may all influence how they process traumatic experiences.
The findings suggest that the psychological impact of combat cannot be understood solely by measuring exposure to danger. Individual vulnerabilities and the social and ideological frameworks through which people interpret traumatic events may also shape their response.
For soldiers returning from prolonged periods of war, understanding these factors could help researchers and clinicians identify individuals who may be particularly vulnerable to long-term psychological distress and develop more targeted forms of support.
Caroline Haïat
Comments