Meaning and inconsistencies of meaning – exploring the perspectives of Norwegian veterans in Afghanistan

Military personnel from several nations have been deployed to different conflict areas abroad, such as Afghanistan. The personnel who have worked in a threatening environment or have been exposed to stressful events might initiate a meaning-making process, as such experiences have the potential to be inconsistent with global meaning (Park 2010). Global meaning is described as our goals and the established beliefs about the world, the self, and the self in the world (Park and Folkman 1997). Such goals and beliefs constitute a framework from which we can assess new experiences (Park 2010). A meaning-making process is initiated by an appraisal of an event, and in cases of inconsistencies, coping strategies are used to attribute meaning to the event and ourselves in it. This line of reasoning is found in the cognitive theories of Horowitz’ Stress Response Theory (Horowitz 2001) and the Theory of Assumptive Worlds (Janoff-Bulman 1989). The outcome of this process might lead to improved personal skills, resources, and relationships, as well as to new perspectives on life, sometimes called personal growth or benefit finding (Park 2010).

Finding meaning after being exposed to stressful events has been investigated in the military context (refer review by Schok et al. 2008). Veterans report stress responses and positive effects, benefits, or growth after war-related experiences (Aldwin et al. 1994; Elder and Clipp 1989; Fontana and Rosenheck 1998; Forsvarets Sanitet 2013; Mehlum 1995), and most veterans experience more positive than negative outcomes of serving in war (Schok et al. 2008). Qualitative research has explored those aspects of veterans' experience that are found meaningful (Britt et al. 2001; Mooren et al. 2009; Schok et al. 2010a) and how they correlate with positive outcomes, such as stress-related growth and benefit finding (Britt et al. 2001; Fontana and Rosenheck 1998; Schok et al. 2010b). However, in a military context, this area of research seems to be limited, and different ways of conceptualizing meaning sometimes restrict comparison (Schok et al. 2008). This study explores the aspects of service that veterans find meaningful after being redeployed from Afghanistan. Moreover, it explores inconsistencies in appraisal of meaning that activate coping strategies in order to attribute new meaning to such events.

There are different ways of conceptualizing meaning (Bellin 2012; Park 2010; Park and Folkman 1997). Mascaro and Rosen (2008) define meaning as the “possession of a coherent framework for viewing life that provides a sense of purpose or direction, which, if lived with in accord, can bring about a sense of fulfillment” (p. 578—579). According to Janoff-Bulman (1989), such a framework relates to how we view benevolence in the world, whether distribution of outcomes is a result of justice, control or chance, and beliefs about ourselves regarding morale, self-control, and luck. Several such categories that constitute a coherent framework are suggested in the literature (Park 2010). For instance, Baumeister (1991) points out that we need our life to make sense with respect to four universal needs for meaning: purpose, value, efficacy, and self-worth. Purpose refers to goals described as future objective outcomes, and fulfillment of goals is described as future subjective states of being. Fulfillment is often connected to positive emotions, e.g., feelings of pride in reaching a specific goal. Value refers to the labels attached to some behavior as right and good in order to give a sense of goodness and avoid moral distress. Baumeister (1991) describes a value base as something good in itself that does not need any further justification. Efficacy refers to a belief that one can influence the surroundings and execute a degree of control in certain situations. Self-worth refers to self-respect and respect of others. This often involves ranking oneself in relation to others to feel superior in some domains. In this respect, belonging to a group seems to be important as it gives individuals access to others' perceptions of them and the possibility to draw self-esteem from group membership (Baumeister 1991). Such terms as self-worth, self-esteem, and self-concept are used interchangeably here (Baumeister 1991; Oyserman 2004).

People do not necessarily consciously identify their global meaning structures or think in terms of the needs for meaning (Baumeister 1991; Park 2010). Moreover, meanings can also be uttered at different cognitive levels (Baumeister and Vohs 2002; Vallacher and Wegner 1989). Previous research illustrates the aspects of service that military personnel report finding meaningful. Such common meaning assigned to service in war seems to concern comradeship and social support, purpose of mission, and significance of work (Schok et al. 2010a). For instance, the gratitude of the local people is meaningful to soldiers, as it seems to be a reward for their presence and efforts (Schok et al. 2010a). Team cohesion and receiving gratitude from locals are also what motivate US combat units to continue fighting (Wong et al. 2003). Britt et al. (2001) also pointed out that in a US peacekeeping operation in Bosnia, meaningful service was related to the significance of the work. Here, significance was described in terms of how soldiers reported the importance of their job, commitment to their job, and how much they identified with the mission.

Categories of global meaning might also be related to incongruence or inconsistencies of meaning. Global meaning directs what to expect and, consequently, allows one to determine whether the appraised meaning in a certain situation is regarded as consistent or inconsistent with global meaning (Park and Folkman 1997). For instance, an experience might be inconsistent with global meaning if it involves loss of meaning, fear for one's life, or a feeling of helplessness, which indicate a loss of control, as found among veterans with stress symptoms (Fontana and Rosenheck 2005; Schok et al. 2010a). Thus, coping with stressful situations is meaningful as it gives a sense of control. According to Janoff-Bulman (1992), control and predictability are the most important global categories of meaning. Meaning-making coping strategies refer to the effort to reduce any presence of inconsistencies between global meaning and situational meaning (Park 2010) so that congruence of meaning can be restored (Skaggs and Barron 2006). The outcome of this process might be twofold: finding new global meaning or situational meaning (Park 2010). However, several meaning-making coping strategies are described in the literature (Park 2010). Park and Folkman (1997) refer to positive appraisal, revision of goals, and planning of goal-directed problem-focused coping, as well as activating spiritual beliefs and experiences, as meaning-making coping. The use of attributions or reattributions is often seen as applying cognitive strategies to establish causality and responsibility for an event to change situational or global meaning, something that often relates to the perception of control (Park 2010; Park and Folkman 1997). According to Baumeister (1991) and Sommer et al. (2012), the need for value might be satisfied by externalizing responsibility for one's own behavior or stating one's own good intentions in cases of failure, and the need for self-worth by comparing oneself with others less fortunate, thus asserting superiority or assuming credit for success.

Being deployed to a war zone likely includes experiences of stressful situations. Some of the experiences will be found meaningful, as documented in previous research (Britt et al. 2001; Schok et al. 2010a; Wong et al. 2003). However, people who have experienced stressful situations often initiate a meaning-making process as it might challenge established meaning structures. Experiences appraised as incongruent with such established meaning structures are here termed as inconsistencies of meaning. Previous research also includes examples of what veterans report as inconsistencies of meaning (Schok et al. 2010a) and general descriptions of meaning-making coping strategies used to restore meaning congruence (Park 2010; Park and Folkman 1997; Skaggs and Barron 2006). The problem statement of this study is twofold: what aspects of the service do veterans find meaningful, and how are these meaningful aspects related to inconsistencies of meaning and meaning-making coping strategies? To answer these questions, 13 members of a Norwegian Air Force Protection Unit were interviewed about their service in Afghanistan, as described later. The findings in this study have been substantiated through a functional exposition of meaning: purpose, value, efficacy, and self-worth, as advocated by Baumeister (1991).

As illustrated in Figure 1 below, we identified three main themes of meaning, each theme being specified with keywords for each of the categories. The themes of meaning were as follows: 1) “Confirmation of ability”, 2) “Cohesion of peers”, and 3) “Significance of effort”. We also identified three themes of inconsistencies, specified here with a brief description of what constituted the inconsistency theme and an accompanying meaning-making coping strategy. The themes of inconsistencies were “Risky confirmation”, “Impaired cohesion”, and “Little significance”.

Figure 1

We believe that the themes of meaning and the themes of inconsistencies are interrelated as illustrated. The number assigned to each category indicates how many of the respondents have at least one quote within the category in question. In the following sections, each of the themes is described more thoroughly and exemplified with quotes from the respondents, designated by numbers 1—13, starting with the first theme of meaning and then the first theme of inconsistency. During these descriptions, we also use the following wording about frequency: “Most respondents” is used when referring to at least seven respondents. “Many” refers to five or six, “some” refers to three or four respondents, and “few” refers to one or two respondents.

This study explored the aspects of military service that veterans find meaningful. The findings show that meaning was found in the following themes: Confirmation of ability, Cohesion of peers, and Significance of effort. We believe that the following aspects of service satisfy the needs for meaning: purpose, value, efficacy, and self-worth (Baumeister 1991). We have further explored how some experiences are inconsistent with such meaningful aspects of the service and found one theme of inconsistency for each theme of meaning, specifically, Risky confirmation, Impaired cohesion, and Little significance. We also found that these inconsistencies of meaning activated certain meaning-making coping strategies. The coping strategies found in this study, Counterfactual thinking, Downward comparison, and Justification, are described as meaning-making coping strategies used to alter the meaning of a situation by reappraisal of an event (Baumeister 1991; Park 2010; Park and Folkman 1997). The veterans' description of inconsistencies of meaning and coping strategies does not indicate any contemplation over the global and appraised meanings of their experiences. For example, indifference from civilians is coped with by justifying one's own choices. In this lies a sense of acceptance of reality. In comparison, Schok et al. (2010a) reported that veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms were more preoccupied with negative notions that also had an emotional impact, such as feeling disconnected from the civil society and being irritated by ignorant and spoiled civilians (Schok et al. 2010a).

Finding meaning in a military context might be somewhat different from other contexts. Military personnel are not random victims of negative life events. They are selected and trained to cope with stressful situations (Larner and Blow 2011). Thus, soldiers have probably already found some purpose for the mission before being deployed. In this study, Coping, as a test of oneself, was sometimes phrased as a goal. Here, Coping connected prior training to active service in war, as well as personal qualities to qualities needed in the role of a soldier. To our knowledge, finding purpose in coping as a test of oneself has not previously been found within the research on meaning-making process in a military context. However, it has been documented that soldiers who volunteer for military service abroad are sometimes motivated by the adventure and opportunities to test themselves in a stressful environment (Battistelli et al. 1999). On the other hand, the importance of cohesion resonates with previous research on meaning making, whereby strong cohesion or comradeship represents trust and safety during the deployment (Schok et al. 2010a). Such commitment to each other's safety and common goals are in the soldiers' self-interest (Siebold 2007) and might be viewed as a reasonable adaptation to the context. However, only a few of the veterans spoke explicitly of this theme as a goal. The theme Significance of effort relates to how the veterans established the belief that their efforts had an effect. Knowing that your efforts matter is probably important to most veterans as it gives a sense of purpose to the mission (Schok et al. 2010a), making the burden, stress, and risk involved in such deployments worthwhile. In this study, some veterans expressed a sense of fulfillment, indicating that they had found purpose in their deployment.

Furthermore, finding meaningful aspects of the service, such as value, efficacy, and self-worth, also fulfilled the other needs for meaning (Baumeister 1991). First, meaning was found in Confirmation of ability through the experience of Coping and Recognition of ability. This indicated that the veterans confirmed or enhanced their perception of their efficacy and self-worth. This theme was related to the inconsistency theme Risky confirmation, which related to a reduced perception of control and an effort to reestablish self-esteem through Counterfactual thinking. Second, meaning was found in Cohesion of peers through Belonging, Backing, and Caring. This indicated that the veterans enhanced their perceptions of collective efficacy and collective self-esteem. This theme was related to the inconsistency theme Impaired cohesion, which possibly concerned a reduced perception of collective efficacy and collective self-esteem through unreliable team members, as well as an effort to reestablish mainly collective self-esteem through Downward comparison. Third, meaning was found in Significance of effort through Contribution, Recognition of effort, and Status from effort. This indicated an enhanced perception of value, collective efficacy, self-worth, and collective self-esteem. This theme was related to Little significance, which was possibly related to the reduced moral value of their efforts and a strategy of Justification to defend this reduced moral value.

We argue that meaning constructs and the meaning-making process are to be understood in terms of needs for meaning. However, people rarely think and speak in such terms (Baumeister 1991; Park 2010). For instance, people might report thoughts and behavior known as coping strategies, but they are not necessarily aware of why they are using these strategies (Park 2010). Thus, we can only substantiate the connection of meaningful aspects of the service to such needs for meaning. At the same time, we might not pick up important nuances when using the wording of the respondents. In this study, recognition was expressed as an important part of the experience, but there might be a difference between positive feedback received for one's skills or effects of efforts, and the gratitude received from people who are personally affected by the war. The former might mostly respond to the need for efficacy and self-worth and the latter to the need for value. Gratitude is described as a response to moral behavior and an emotion that connects people to society, as people might be grateful toward people they have never met (McCullough et al. 2001). Thus, feeling a sense of value in this particular context might be largely dependent on gratitude from people outside the military organization. This might explain why recognition from civilians seemed to matter so much in this study. In comparison, medal ceremonies were sometimes described as being of little importance. Such ceremonies can probably refer to several needs for meaning, but recognition from people who are personally involved and have firsthand knowledge probably matters more than recognition from others. Thus, medal ceremonies might be perceived as a result of institutional practice rather than personal involvement.

Another problem of connecting meaning to needs for meaning is that some experiences of the veterans might be substantiated within several needs for meaning. In this study, the inconsistency theme Unreliable team members was presumed to predominantly affect collective efficacy when experiencing lack of trust and backup from other team members. However, the strategy of downward comparison indicated a need to protect one's own self-worth. Efficacy and self-worth might often work together in real-life experiences. The situation of unreliable team members might comprise a threat to both collective efficacy and self-esteem, as it might be perceived as both a threat to trust in others' support and a threat to belongingness to the team. In general, group belonging provides a basis for receiving support (Haslam et al. 2005), but support also functions as an affirmation of group belonging (Thoits 1986). Alternatively, there is a close relationship between the constructs of self-efficacy and self-esteem (Bong and Skaalvik 2003; Judge and Bono 2001), even though they are also described as two separate constructs (Chen et al. 2004). The same connection is found between self-esteem and value, whereby self-enhancing evaluation, such as perceiving one's action as morally good, might be viewed as maintenance of self-esteem (Sommer et al. 2012).

The findings in this study are the result of researchers' interpretations and abstractions and might be biased due to leading questions and experimenter expectancy (Kvale 1996). This is a well-known criticism of qualitative research, for instance, when preconceived attitudes and insider perspectives influence the research process (Flick 2009). However, being an insider from the military organization might also be an advantage as trust can be established with the respondents. This research also involves researcher subjective abstraction during analysis, e.g., the abstraction of quotes to coding and coding to themes of meaning. In this study, the second author investigated the proposed coding and themes to ensure that they were grounded in relevant quotes (Creswell 2013), as well as including discussions on alternative understanding.

The retrospective nature of this study also has its limitations. Development and refinement of meaning structures over time is an important attribute of the meaning-making process (Park 2010; Skaggs and Barron 2006). Thus, a longitudinal design with two or more concurrent measurement points could have reflected this process better. For instance, longitudinal research using measures from the pre-deployment to the post-deployment periods would allow for examination of change in meaning structures over time. Moreover, even though we identify inconsistencies of meaning and accompanying coping strategies, we do not capture the end state of this meaning-making process. Thus, this study does not document whether the coping strategies are effective and result in successful integration as we have anticipated (Park 2010). However, we believe that this study concerns veterans without severe stress responses and acknowledge at the same time that the meaning-making process, in particular, of veterans with stress responses, also covers other categories or needs for meaning than those chosen in this study, e.g., as found in the study by Schok et al. (2010a). Furthermore, meaning structures are also constructed within a particular social context (Bartone 2005; Weick 1995) such that there may be differences in the beliefs and goals of soldiers from different nations, branches, and units. The veterans in this study have returned to the same home base unit, which also represents a certain social context. A comparison group of veterans could have demonstrated influence from different social contexts on meaning making, for instance, a study of veterans having served within the same unit but returning to military versus civilian lives afterward.

The findings of this study are in line with those of Schok et al. (2010a), who explored the meaning-making proess among Dutch peacekeeping soldiers in Cambodia, in particular, the themes Cohesion of peers and Significance of effort. Bearing this in mind, one should note that in our study, the veterans most often saw their efforts in relation to lower-level military objectives and not the overall development in the country as found in the study of Schok et al. (2010a). Further research might reveal whether military campaigns regarded as unsuccessful in the overall mission by the majority of the veterans (Forsvarets Sanitet 2013) intensify the veterans' focus on lower-level mission objectives, as found in our study. Further research could also explain differences between these two studies, such as the theme Confirmation of ability, which was found in our study but not reported in the study by Schok et al. (2010a). Furthermore, finding meaningful aspects of the service is associated with better adjustment to stress and personal growth, in particular, for units experiencing high-threat situations (Fontana and Rosenheck 1998; Schok et al. 2010b). Finding meaning is also related to personal growth, such as the enhanced self-esteem and self-efficacy among Norwegian veterans having served in Afghanistan (Forsvarets Sanitet 2013). The findings in this study and previous research indicate what might be regarded as common aspects of meaning found by veterans. A measure covering such common aspects of meaning might be constructed for use in quantitative surveys to explain what part of the experience leads to such personal growth in terms of purpose, value, efficacy, and self-worth.

We have explored the aspects of military service that veterans find meaningful and how these aspects are related to inconsistencies of meaning and meaning-making coping strategies. We found that meaning and inconsistencies of meaning relate to such themes as Confirmation of ability and Risky confirmation, Cohesion of peers and Impaired cohesion, as well as Significance of effort and Little significance. We also found that veterans use different meaning-making coping strategies, such as Counterfactual thinking, Downward comparison, and Justification in an effort to restore meaning congruence. To the best of our knowledge, no other research has explicitly separated themes of meaning, themes of inconsistencies, and coping strategies, as done in this study. Thus, we argue that the current study contributes to a thorough understanding of the difference between meaningful aspects of the service and the process of meaning making. This seems to be important within a field of research with different ways of operationalizing meaning. It also lays the grounds for further investigation into how meaningful aspects of the service and the meaning-making process independently might be determinants of personal growth among veterans.