Using the Triangle Model of Responsibility to Understand Psychological Ambiguities in Peacekeeping Operations.
WALTER REED ARMY INST OF RESEARCH WASHINGTON DC
Pagination or Media Count:
The present paper illustrates how the Triangle Model of Responsibility Sclenker, Britt, Pennington, Murphy, Doherty, 1994 can be used as an integrative framework for understanding psychological ambiguities during peacekeeping operations. The model defines responsibility as the psychological adhesive that connects an individual to event and to relevant prescriptions that should govern conduct. The model specifies that assessing responsibility requires information about the event, the relevant prescriptions or rules that govern the event, and the identity images or roles possessed by the individual that are relevant to the event. Responsibility is a direct function of the strength of the linkages between the event, prescriptions, and identity elements, and the importance of the elements to the individual. More specifically, high responsibility exists when a clear, well-defined set of prescriptions are applicable to the event prescription-event link, the individual has personal control over the event identity-event link, and the event, prescriptions, andor identity images are important to the individual. Peacekeeping operations involve the potential for weakened linkages the rules for a mission are unclear or conflicting, the soldier does not feel trained to do his or her job, the soldier has no feeling of personal control and elements the soldier believes what he or she is doing is not important, resulting in lower degrees of responsibility, commitment, and moral. A detailed discussion of the relevance of the model to peacekeeping operations is given, and recent research relevant to the utility of the model is presented.
- Military Operations, Strategy and Tactics