Question 5

Question 1

Mutual Risk:

Answer 1

galitarian norms in combat units are often enforced through the recognition of mutual risk among soldiers. Shared experiences of danger and hardship foster a sense of solidarity and equality among unit members.

Question 2

Primary Group Attachments:

Answer 2

Soldiers rely heavily on their primary group attachments, such as the “buddy system,” to ensure group safety and security. These close-knit bonds promote collective responsibility for each other’s well-being.

Question 3

Norms of Cooperation:

Answer 3

Egalitarian norms emphasize cooperation and collective effort over individualism. Soldiers are expected to prioritize the safety and success of the group over personal interests.

Question 4

Informal Sanctions:

Answer 4

Deviant behavior that threatens group safety or cohesion is typically met with informal sanctions from fellow unit members. These may include social ostracism, loss of trust, or corrective action within the unit.

Question 5

The Dud:

Answer 5

In combat units, the status of the “dud” is typically assigned to individuals who fail to meet the expectations of group solidarity or contribute adequately to the collective effort. They may be perceived as liabilities or weak links within the unit.

Question 6

The Hero:

Answer 6

echelon of less risk and more comfort.
The opposite role was that of the “hero.” Unlike
the dud, the hero wanted to do more than his share
for the organization. In doing so he made it necessary for others to follow, or at least to expose
themselves to additional risk.
A guy who is just trying to show that he’s not
scared and sometimes trying to show up the other
men. He’s not braver. You shouldn’t stick your neck
out unless you have to. If someone gives me an order,
we’ll do it but we aren’t going to take any unnecessary
chances. If a guy gets a medal for doing his job it’s
O.K. But if he’s taken a chance or exposed his men,
he’s no hero because he’s made it more risky for
everyone.
The hero frequently boasted of his courage and
aggressiveness. He clamored for intensive combat.
Like the dud, the hero appeared to be thinking first
of himself, and only secondarily of the other members of the squad or platoon. No more than the dud
could he be depended upon to act as one bound by
his loyalty to a buddy

Question 7

Commonalities Between “Dud” and “Hero” Statuses:

Answer 7

The Dud
Characteristics:

Minimal Contribution: The dud does the bare minimum to get by and is deliberately undependable. Unlike individuals who may lack skills or suffer from nervousness, the dud actively avoids responsibilities and tasks.
Craftiness in Avoidance: The dud is often adept at evading work, whether by lingering in the chow line, dallying on work details, or frequently attending sick calls. This behavior forces others to compensate for their lack of contribution.
Isolation and Impact on Morale: The dud’s actions lead to increased workload for others, creating resentment and leading to their isolation from the group. This person becomes the butt of jokes and is often alienated by their peers.
Outcomes:

Partial Reintegration: Sometimes, under peer pressure, the dud begins to contribute adequately. However, their past behavior is not easily forgotten, and they continue to be reminded of their previous actions through jokes and nicknames.
Increased Isolation: More commonly, the dud remains isolated and eventually seeks transfer to less demanding roles, such as driver or cook’s helper, positions that are less risky and more comfortable.
The Hero
Characteristics:

Over-Contribution: The hero attempts to do more than their share, often boasting about their courage and seeking out combat situations. This behavior exposes others to unnecessary risks and can be seen as self-serving.
Lack of Dependability: Similar to the dud, the hero is also perceived as putting personal motives above group loyalty. Their actions, while brave, are seen as reckless and inconsiderate of the group’s safety.
Outcomes:

Negative Perception: While officially recognized and awarded for their bravery, heroes are often viewed negatively by their peers for the additional risks they impose. Their boasting can further isolate them from the group.
Eventual Reintegration: Heroes may eventually “reform” by boasting less and adapting to the group’s sentiments. As they become old-timers in the platoon, they volunteer less frequently, thereby becoming more acceptable members of the group.
Shared Factors Leading to Ostracism
Both the dud and the hero are ostracized due to their extreme behaviors which disrupt the cohesion and morale of the platoon. The dud’s refusal to participate fully burdens others, while the hero’s overzealousness endangers the group. Both roles highlight the importance of balanced participation and the negative impact of deviating too far from the group norm.

Broader Implications
The existence of these deviant roles underscores the necessity for a balanced approach to performance and contribution in high-stress environments like combat. It highlights how extreme behaviors, whether towards minimal effort or excessive risk-taking, can undermine the functional integrity and morale of a unit. Furthermore, it reflects the complex social dynamics within military groups, where peer pressure, group cohesion, and the struggle for acceptance play crucial roles in shaping individual behaviors and group outcomes.

Question 8

Inverse Relationship Between Social and Geographical Distance:

Answer 8

Social Distance: As soldiers move up in rank or hierarchy within the military, social distance between them may increase. Officers and enlisted personnel may have limited interaction or understanding of each other’s experiences and perspectives.
Geographical Distance: Conversely, as soldiers move closer to the combat zone, geographical distance decreases, and the bonds of solidarity within the unit often strengthen. Shared experiences of combat create strong ties that transcend social differences.

Question 9

Impact of Strong Group Ties on Post-Service Decisions:

Answer 9

Volunteering for Return Tours: Soldiers who form strong bonds within their combat units may feel a sense of duty or loyalty to their fellow comrades, leading them to volunteer for return tours of duty to support their unit.
Re-Enlistment: The camaraderie and sense of belonging experienced in combat units may also influence soldiers to re-enlist in the military, seeking to maintain the close relationships forged during their service.
Contributions to PTSD: However, the intense emotional bonds formed in combat can also contribute to the development of PTSD. Traumatic experiences shared within the unit may exacerbate psychological distress and lead to long-term mental health challenges for soldiers.