Operational Psychology: An Emerging Subdiscipline

Abstract

There has been recognition across the Department of Defense (DoD) that psychologists are increasingly called on by military commanders to support military operations in unique and diverse ways. This call has resulted in the expansion of the role of military psychology. Military psychologists are treading where they have not previously, and this has raised a number of concerns in terms of training preparation and ethics. In this article we explore an emerging subdiscipline in behavioral science, operational psychology. A series of vignettes illustrates this subdiscipline in practice, and a discussion of training implications and ethical considerations follows accordingly.In recent years a new subdiscipline has emerged in psychology: operational psychology. This subdiscipline has revealed itself predominantly within military psychology, although other government agencies employ psychologists and behavioral science experts who perform duties similar to those performed by operational psychologists. Although psychology has been applied to nontraditional (nonmedical) areas for many decades, the nature of these applications and the frequency with which they are occurring has increased significantly since 9/11 and the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT). One result of this change has been recognition by many that a new area of specialization is emerging. As a relatively new area of practice, operational psychology has remained somewhat obscure and is often misunderstood by psychologists, including those within the military.

Top Ethical Challenges for Military Clinical Psychologists

“…As increasing numbers of military psychologists deploy with military units to provide clinical care (Hoyt, 2006) or operational mission contributions (Staal & Stephenson, 2006), it is reasonable to expect existing ethical dilemmas to be amplified (Johnson et al, 2005) and new dilemmas to emerge (Kennedy & Zillmer, 2006).…”

“…These challenges are not presented in any order of significance; the topics reflect the author's experience as a uniformed clinician, a supervisor and colleague to several current military psychologists, as well as recent scholarship on the topic of ethics in military service (Howe, 1986;Jeffery et al, 1992;Johnson et al, 2005;Kennedy & Zillmer, 2006;Orme & Doerman, 2001;Page, 1996;Staal & Stephenson, 2006).…”

“…How can military psychologists engage in evidence-based practice when consulting to an interrogation? Because psychologists have specific expertise in human behavior and because there is a real probability that interrogations are safer and less likely to result in harm to detainees when psychologists are present, those assigned to such roles in the course of their military service should seek specialized training in this area (APA, 2005;Kennedy & Zillmer, 2006;Shumate & Borum, 2006;Staal & Stephenson, 2006). gists to "make known their commitment to the ethics code and take steps to resolve the conflict" (p. 1063).…”

“…clude counterinsurgency strategy, human profiling, interrogation and detention support, special mission unit personnel selection, and direct support of counterintelligence operations (Shumate & Borum, 2006;Staal & Stephenson, 2006).…”

Sleep deprivation and hallucinations. A qualitative study of military personnel

“…Still, the knowledge about the nature of hallucinations caused by sleep loss is very limited both when it comes to the nature/content of hallucinations, additional circumstantial factors other than sleep deprivation that may trigger hallucinations and how officers deal with/react to hallucinations. Studies on the nature of hallucinations in military contexts are of high relevance for personnel regarding recognition and reactions to such events, especially since these may have implications for behavior and decisions that might have serious operational consequences (Staal & Stephenson, 2006). Against this background, we wanted to explore the phenomena and experiences related to sleep lossinduced hallucinations.…”