Identifying and understanding factors associated with failure to complete infantry training among British Army recruits By Matthew D Kiernan, BMedSci Thesis submitted to the University of Nottingham For the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences School of Nursing July 2011 ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Over 30% of the British Army‟s Infantry Recruits who underwent training between 1999 and 2003 failed to complete their training. Previous studies have focused predominantly on identifying the cumulative reasons for failure. There is a dearth of research investigating the effect of failure on the individual recruit and what influences their ability to pass training. AIM: The overall aims of this study were: to achieve an understanding of the role that antecedent personal, social and demographic factors play in a British Army recruit‟s ability to complete basic training; to investigate the possibility of identifying predictive factors that would identify infantry recruits who were at risk of being unable to cope with the transition to life in the British Army; and to explore the reasons given by those recruits who failed to complete basic training to develop a more comprehensive understanding of why recruits fail. METHODS: All new army recruits joining the first and second battalion between September 2002 and March 2003 were invited to take part in the study. A biographical questionnaire based on a modified version of the US Army‟s 115 item biographical questionnaire form was self-completed prior to infantry training by all those agreeing to take part in the study. Study participants were monitored weekly throughout their training and the training outcome (pass/fail) was recorded. The data was randomly split into a development dataset (two thirds) and a test dataset (one third). Independent variables were grouped into five categories (Demographic & Physical Measurement, Education, Outdoor Education, Non-Physical Activity and Conduct and Behaviour) and tested univariably and multivariably to examine their association with training outcome in the development dataset using 2 logistic regression. The multivariable model was then used to construct a score and its sensitivity and specificity was tested using the test dataset. All those within the study who failed to complete Infantry recruit training were invited to take part in a qualitative semi-structured exit interview. These interviews were analysed using framework analysis methodology. Findings from both the quantitative and qualitative analysis were integrated to determine whether prediction of failure was practicable and to develop an increased understanding of the impact that antecedent factors and training experiences contributed to training failure. RESULTS: Of the study cohort of 999 recruits 36.2% (n=362) failed. Within the failure group 74.4% (n=269) gave reasons to suggest that this was attributable to difficulties in adapting to life in the British Army Infantry. Factors associated with higher odds of failure were: absence of female siblings (p=0.005), aggressive coping strategies (p=0.013), use of ecstasy (p=0.02), evenings per week spent at the family home (p=0.032), truancy (p=0.039), an increased number of schools attended (p=0.046) and classroom behaviour (p=0.052). The area under the curve on the test dataset was 0.58 (0.501-0.65 95% CI). Analysis of the qualitative data suggested that there was a marked difference between the socio-personal identity of recruits who failed training and the organisational identity of the British Army Infantry. Cognitive dissonance and varying extremes of stress were reported by those recruits that failed during the transition to military life. CONCLUSION: A screening tool constructed from items of the biographical questionnaire was unable to predict failure in training with sufficient accuracy to recommend its routine use for new recruits to British Army Infantry training. This study has identified that there is a lack of fit between military identity and the socio-personal identity of the infantry recruit which results in dissonance 3 and stress during the transition into the military. It is recommended that future studies should focus on how to reduce the psychological impact of the transition into infantry training. 4 Acknowledgments This study would not have been possible without the participation of the infantry recruits who enlisted into the British Army between September 2002 and March 2003. I am very grateful for their openness and honesty and especially grateful to those who consented to an interview following failure in training. This must have been a very difficult time and I would like to sincerely thank them for their help. The entire study would not have been possible without the funding kindly provided by the Royal Centre for Defence Medicine, the cooperation of the Army Recruitment and Training Division, and the Infantry Training Centre at Catterick Garrison. I would especially like to thank my Commanding Officer Surgeon Commander John Sharpley who has been a constant support throughout this study and has always ensured that I had a healthy balance between service commitments and study time. My supervisors, Dr Julie Repper and Dr Tony Arthur, have been a constant source of encouragement and guidance and I am grateful for the insight and expertise that they have provided throughout the course of the study, I feel truly privileged to have had them as supervisors. Dr Nicola Fear was an invaluable source of help and guidance in the early phases of the study and provided invaluable insight into study design and statistical analysis. Corporal Samantha Holden and Corporal Lindsey Atkinson receive special thanks for all their help during the data collection phase and Dr Mark Turner and Sylvia Jankowska for their constructive input during the final stages of the study. I would also like to extend my thanks to the numerous others who have 5 tolerated me throughout the study and offered a listening ear, opinion and reassurance. Victoria Kiernan, my wife, has been a constant support throughout and has ensured that I always had an environment of calm and quiet to study in, as well as an endless supply of tea. I would like to dedicate this thesis to Vicky and my sons, Henry, Thomas, and Charlie as without their support I could never have completed it. Thank you. 6 CONTENTS ABSTRACT .................................................................................................... 2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................. 5 CONTENTS .................................................................................................... 7 LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................11 LIST OF TABLES .........................................................................................12 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................14 CHAPTER 1: SOCIAL, ORGANISATIONAL AND MILITARY IDENTITY .....23 1.1: Social identity ..................................................................................................... 23 1.1.1: Categorisation ............................................................................................... 23 1.1.2: Partial identification and temporal variation .................................................. 24 1.2: Organisational identity ....................................................................................... 26 1.2.1: The nature of organisations ........................................................................... 26 1.2.2: Organisational attractiveness ........................................................................ 26 1.2.3: Identification and internalisation .................................................................... 28 1.2.4: Belonging and commitment ........................................................................... 30 1.3: Military identity ................................................................................................... 35 1.3.1: The military organisation ............................................................................... 35 1.3.2: Impact of Military Identity ............................................................................... 39 1.3.3: Cognitive dissonance, military service and identity conflict .......................... 40 1.3.4: Military newcomers ........................................................................................ 42 1.3.5: Acceptance in the military organisation ......................................................... 45 1.3.6: Newcomer vulnerability in military service .................................................... 48 1.4: Summary ............................................................................................................. 52 CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY ....................................................................56 2.1: Aims of the study................................................................................................ 56 2.2: Methodological consideration ........................................................................... 57 2.3: Study design ....................................................................................................... 60 2.4: Setting .................................................................................................................. 62 2.4.1: Military personnel structure ..........................................................................