Search results

We aimed to assess, in socio-cultural context, the level of hatred and revenge in war veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The sampling frame consisted of 215 Kosova War veterans, randomly selected. The Harvard Trauma Questionnaire was used to assess the prevalence of PTSD and Manchester Short Assessment of Life was used to assess social satisfactions. The participants were asked to declare the strength of feelings of hatred and revenge in the four preceding weeks by using four items scale: not at all, a little bit/sometimes, a lot and extremely. Willingness for action of veterans was assessed using three item scale: yes, no or maybe. A probability level of 0.05 was adopted to be considered as statistically significant for differences among groups. DSM-IV-TR criteria for PTSD (very similar to DSM-V) were met by 52.6% of veterans; the data have confirmed existence of thoughts and fantasies of revenge against opposing forces by 42.8% veterans; at the same level 42.8% manifested feelings of hatred. Fantasies of taking revenge a lot was recorded by 19.5% and extremely by 1.4% of veterans, while hateful thoughts at level a lot were likely expressed by 22.3% and extreme by 2.8% of veterans. It is important to note that 84.7% were confident to act based on their beliefs. Social-economic and cultural factors have played major role in the understanding of psychological problems of traumatized individuals with a direct impact on their ability to function socially. This study has confirmed the urgent need for the establishment of psychological rehabilitation programs as well as programs for the social and economic rehabilitation of War Veterans.

How should researchers navigate and interpret the moral emotions evoked in them in research on trauma? In this reflective essay, the authors discuss their experience as researchers on moral injury (MI) in veterans and police personnel in the Netherlands. Stories of MI usually do not allow for a clear-cut categorization of the affected person as a victim or perpetrator. This ambivalence, in fact, is explicitly part of the concept of MI. It means however that researchers face complicated psychological, ethical and methodological challenges during research on MI.

The authors contemplate these challenges by describing two empirical cases demonstrating the particular moral challenges that emerge in MI research. Drawing from literature on qualitative research and emotions, the authors distil different perspectives on the role of moral emotions in research.

Reflecting on the ambivalent and difficult emotions the authors experienced as researchers when listening to personal accounts of moral injury, the authors offer insights into the necessity and delicacy of navigating between the methodological potential and the ethical and psychological risks of such emotions.

This study is relevant for all researchers examining trauma, in particular when the research is surrounded by complex ethical questions. While the issue of managing emotions in research on trauma is challenging in itself, it is further complicated when the stories related by respondents challenge the researcher's own moral beliefs and values.