Values and Virtues in the Military. Nadine Eggimann Zanetti

as a positive institution, qualifying for an organization that offers main services to society (i.e., as education and training of young men becoming soldiers, contributing to national security) becoming a key resource for collectivity. Overall, the military is an institution that works for the greater good of a society, with a strong emphasis on character development, values, morale, and welfare (Matthews, 2009).

      Values, virtues, and character strengths are recognized as being critical for military leadership (Matthews et al., 2006b). There are a number of studies showing evidence that positive personality traits and good character predict success, effecting leadership, coping, and adaptation in challenging military contexts. In the following a set of studies is presented to illustrate the extending research devoted to positive psychology within military psychology in order to analyze the role of positive characteristics of soldiers.

      The first study on applying positive psychology to the military was on “grit,” a positive character trait defined as a measure of passionate pursuit of long-term goals. Duckworth, Peterson, Matthews, and Kelly (2007) looked at how grit might have a contribution in predicting retention in Cadet Basic Training (CBT) and for academic performance in the first year at the United States Military Academy ←46 | 47→(“West Point”). They compared the results with alternative predictors such as aptitude, leadership, and physical fitness. As they reported in their study, grit was the only statistically significant variable in predicting the successful retention in CBT. Also, no evidence was given that grit correlates with aptitude, leadership, or physical fitness measures. Additionally, grit was a significant predictor of academic grades during the cadet’s first year at West Point. Matthews, Peterson, and Kelly (2006a) had all incoming members of West Point rate themselves on the 24 character strengths. At the end of CBT they compared the mean self-ratings in the VIA-IS and concluded that cadets who successfully completed CBT rated themselves significantly higher than those who left on nine strengths: bravery; vitality (zest); fairness; integrity; persistence (according to Matthews [2012], a trait highly correlated with grit); hope/optimism; leadership; self-regulation; and citizenship/teamwork. It is interesting to mention that these nine strengths are represented in the military doctrine and are therefore understood as relevant to soldier performance. It became evident that there is an overlap between the seven “Army Values” (loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity, and personal courage; US Department of the Army, 2006) and the nine character strengths related to successful completion of West Point CBT. In conclusion, the results of this study pointed out that positive characteristics such as values, virtues, and character strengths are relevant to describe good character, successful leadership, and soldier performance in the military context.

      Another important study, which exemplified how concepts of positive psychology are well suited to assess the nature of good character of soldiers and the overall military, was the study by Matthews et al. (2006b). They compared the VIA-IS-assessed character strengths of a sample of West Point cadets with two comparison groups of Royal Norwegian Naval Academy cadets and US civilians. The results showed that the two military samples consisting of young men and women attracted to military service manifested a different profile of the 24 strengths compared to the civilian counterparts. More precisely, the West Point cadets were more similar in their rank ordering of character strengths to Norwegian cadets than they were to their own fellow American citizens. Furthermore, equivalent character strengths seemed to be important for military success in both samples of West Points and Norwegian cadets. These results allowed for two interpretations. First, military culture is more influential in shaping character strengths of soldiers than the difference in national origins might suggest, and second, that the military environment attracts persons with similar profiles in character strengths.

      Additionally, another set of field studies allowed relating positive characteristics to a variety of aspects of soldier adaptation and performance in training ←47 | 48→exercises. Particularly interesting with direct relation to virtues was the study by Eid, Matthews, and Johnsen (2004). The VIA-IS was administered to Norwegian cadets prior to departing on a ten-week mission involving physically and mentally challenging tasks and a lengthy separation from family and friends, assessing their individual character strengths. Matching the individual strengths to their corresponding moral virtues (i.e., wisdom and knowledge, courage, humanity, justice, temperance, and transcendence)¹³, it was found that the virtues had a marginal influence (p < .15) on self and peer ratings of productivity, self-confidence, and leadership behavior. The two studies of Matthews, Brazil, and Erwin (2009) and Matthews (2009) looked at character strengths and performance of soldiers deployed in actual combat conditions. They surveyed Army officers deployed in combat settings or those who recently returned from deployment, to investigate which strengths are most important to these combat leaders. The strengths consistently most frequently mentioned as relevant to military leaders in combat were bravery, citizenship, persistence, social intelligence, integrity, capacity to love, and judgment. Furthermore, the role of values, virtues, and character strengths in coping and resilience is of particular relevance to the military (Casey, 2011). The establishment of the Comprehensive Soldier Fitness program (Cornum, Matthews, & Seligman, 2011) as positive-psychology-based interventions to increase psychological strength and positive performance in the US Army reinforced the notion that character plays a key role in adapting and performing in combat and shows that within the military context it has been recognized that values and virtues are critical for a successful military profession.

      In brief, these studies indicate that positive characteristics of soldiers must be inevitably taken into account to reliably describe and predict what makes a good, adaptive, and successful soldier. These and other results clearly suggest that positive psychology-derived constructs may contribute significantly to our understanding of how to train and educate soldiers. It is important to learn how values, virtues, and character strengths may play a role for the success of soldiers experiencing extremely challenging training and combat situations. In other words, the three pillars of positive psychology – positive states, positive traits, and positive institutions – provide a framework for pursuing research and application of positive psychology principles to military psychology.

      ←48 | 49→

      In accordance with Matthews (2008), character strengths that are important in combat can differ from those vital to success in training or in administrative job within the military. Whereas military institutions like the US Army hold their main focus on operational military targets and missions, the Swiss Armed Forces is focusing on training for operational readiness. In spite of this difference in missions, the Swiss Armed Forces is likewise an ideal setting for applying the principles of positive psychology. The first study in confirming the value of applying positive psychology to research within the Swiss Armed Forces was conducted by Eggimann and Schneider (2008). They studied character strengths and virtues of Swiss career officers and found hope, curiosity, vitality, bravery, integrity, and self-regulation to be significantly related to higher work satisfaction (cf. Proyer et al., 2012).

3 Research on values and virtues

      Within numerous social science domains (e.g., sociology, political sciences, ethics), values and virtues play an important role, frequently the prime one (e.g., for explaining the circumstances of a value shift, voting behavior, moral judgment). It is recognized that values and virtues attract increasing interest and exhibit a large diversity of influence, and deserve significant research focus (Trommsdorff, 1996). The concepts of values and virtues, however, have been variously interpreted and broadly explored, both within theoretical and practical contexts. It was predominantly the philosophical viewpoint that initially stimulated the core discussions on the subject of values and virtues as psychological concepts (Urban, 1907; Münsterberg, 1908).

      The following sections therefore reference the precursors in philosophy, describing the subject of values and virtues and its conceptual difference. Additionally, the corresponding theoretical approaches within the psychological literature are addressed. A special focus will be given to the relevance of values and virtues within personality psychology as well as positive psychology. Furthermore, areas of research requiring further attention will be highlighted within the following part.