Search results

Since women were first admitted to the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA) in 1976, gender integration has been an important issue. This chapter reviews the works of two social scientists that researched and documented the gender integration efforts of that time. It then summarizes more recent gender climate data, presents data from our study of correlates of cadet perceptions of females at USAFA, and discusses implications of these findings for gender climate and leadership development programs. In the early years of gender integration, male cadets had more traditional attitudes toward women in society than civilian males or female cadets; views that changed little by the time of graduation. Also, they often were vocally opposed to the integration of women at the Academy and in the military and viewed female cadets and officers as less capable leaders. In contrast, the females in the first cohort were less traditional in their attitudes and backgrounds and were very positively supportive of women in nontraditional roles. Nevertheless, they were “feminine” in their gender identities and, unexpectedly, became “more feminine” over the course of their Academy experience.

Despite vast improvements in the past 30 years or so, some gender integration issues remain; there continue to be gender-related jokes and comments, and a small but substantial portion of men do not believe that women belong at the Academy.

In the present study, we looked at what variables predicted men's and women's agreement with the statements: “female cadets can hack it (succeed) here” and “I have no trouble taking orders from a female officer.” We also looked at how cadets rated leadership scenarios featuring either male or female officers.

The findings revealed that different variables predict men's and women's attitudes toward females at USAFA.

Results are discussed in terms of continuing efforts to improve the gender climate at USAFA as well as to enhance leadership development programs.

The call to defund the police emerges globally from the voices of those who stand up to police brutality. Reallocating funds so that non-criminalising entities can meet community needs is crucial, but it does not address the problem in the system of policing. Further, the call for accountability cannot just emerge after a police-related death but must extend to the process of police work, beginning with police academy training. The author can identify and solve the most pressing issues by examining officer training as it is foundational to departmental work culture, organisational structure, and daily decision-making. Based on participant observation of academy lectures, scenario training, and informal conversations at two police academies in the Midwestern part of the United States, the author uncovers daily processes in which new recruits are socialised into their role as officers. Data reveal officers are taught a racialised decision-making logic that prioritises arrest, and perpetuates harm against its citizens. Training also devalues formal education, undermining knowledge that can expand officer thinking and critical self-reflection. Adhering to the goals of activist criminology, this chapter illuminates deeply rooted patterns of oppression and suggests reform aligned with critical social justice and anti-racist principles.

Law enforcement is a stressful profession. Police officers are faced with emotionally exhausting events on a daily basis and are required to control negative emotions in an effort to conduct their jobs effectively. This chapter explores the emotions experienced by police officers and seeks to understand the emotional labor of this profession. Twenty semi-structured interviews were conducted with police officers to garner information about the role of emotional expression and suppression on the job. The results revealed several themes, such as the importance of anger to the job of police officer and the emotional climate within the police force. Understanding emotion work and the management of emotions among law enforcement officers is an important contribution to improving the well-being and performance of police officers. Our research results call for further exploration of the role of emotions in law enforcement.

Law enforcement ethics training has focused traditionally on the development of moral character (see, e.g., Josephson, 2009). This approach is based on the idea that offices imbued with the proper moral values will do the right thing regardless of the circumstances or situational pressures. While good character is clearly important, there is no reliable evidence to support the theory that dispositional qualities are responsible for individual differences in moral behavior. Indeed, contrary to the tenets of virtue ethics, circumstances seem to be the most important factor influencing a person's moral conduct (Doris & Murphy, 2007; Ross & Nisbett, 1991). Any explanation aimed at better understanding the ethical failures of law enforcement must look beyond mere character-based explanations. This chapter explores the developmental, social, and psychological factors that can contribute to immoral behavior. The author concludes with a review of strategies for creating a culture of ethical behavior.

If we are to examine the role of “controls” in different experimental settings, it is appropriate that the word be defined carefully. The Oxford English Dictionary (Second Edition) defines the verb “control” in the following manner: “To exercise restraint or direction upon the free action of; to hold sway over, exercise power or authority over; to dominate, command.” So the word means something more active and interventionist than is suggested by it’s colloquial clinical usage. Control can include such mundane things as ensuring sterile equipment in a chemistry lab, to restrain the free flow of germs and unwanted particles that might contaminate some test.

The past ten to fifteen years have been a turbulent period for the Swedish military. The collapse of the Soviet Union, which was the primary potential enemy, the end of the Cold War, the establishment of the independent Baltic States and Swedish membership in the European Union all combined to render the Swedish defence forces hopelessly outdated. However, although the need for change has been obvious for many years, now many think the progress has been very slow. Some say we should have changed the defence forces dramatically back in the early 1990s. Instead, we chose to implement a series of reorganisations, closing down piece after piece of the old invasion-oriented defence force, while trying to retain as much as possible. What we have today is an eroded conscription system, where military service has become more a question of choice. Despite all this, the public is still quite supportive, thinking that we might need a defence “just in case”, especially as new threats arise. A new trend is that quite many, according to public opinion polls, now think that those who actually do serve as conscripts should get extra compensated with money for this service to society.

The South African armed forces have undergone profound changes over the past decade in almost every aspect of organisation and structure. With the end of the Cold War and the subsequent demise of Apartheid, the South African armed forces moved away from a defence posture focused on national security, to one focused on regional and non-military threats. In terms of force structure, all-white male conscription was replaced with a volunteer system and for the first time the military became representative of a broader society. However, unlike the previous era, where there was a clearly defined threat, the armed forces were obliged to operate under strict budgetary constraints, in an environment where security became subservient to other more pressing socio-economic priorities. (For a historic overview see Cilliers & Heinecken, 1999.) After the first democratic election in 1994 and the acceptance of the new Constitution and Bill of Rights, everything from the country's foreign, domestic and defence policies were revised. In terms of the tasks of the newly formed South African National Defence Force (SANDF), the final Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Article 200 (2), described these as “to defend and protect the Republic, its territorial integrity and its people in accordance with the Constitution and the principles of international law regulating the use of force”. The first and primary role of the SANDF is “defence against external aggression”, but it was for its secondary function, “to defend and protect its people in accordance with the Constitution and principles of international law”, that the SANDF has been most operational, both internally in law and order functions, and more recently, in peace support operations in the region.