Perceptions of purpose, cohesion, and military leadership: A path analysis of potential primary prevention targets to mitigate suicidal ideation

ABSTRACT

Rates of suicide in the US Army continue to rise, and by some accounts exceed the general population. This increase has renewed efforts to identify protective factors that may inform novel suicide prevention strategies. Previous research has demonstrated that a sense of purpose in life and perceived cohesion with military peers are related to a reduction in the severity of suicidal ideation (SI). Additionally, research in military samples supports decreased SI in Soldiers who endorse that their leaders convey a sense of purpose and meaning in their shared mission. However, no work has investigated whether these leadership styles relate to a sense of felt purpose and perceived cohesion in Soldiers and thus the indirect effect of these leadership styles on SI. Active duty Army Soldiers (n = 1,160) completed self-report measures of purpose in life (PiL), perceived cohesion, ethical leadership, loneliness, and SI. Indirect effect analyses were conducted to determine how leadership behaviors indirectly relate to SI through PiL and perceived cohesion. Indirect effect analyses revealed that ethical leadership had an indirect effect on reduced SI through increased PiL. In the same parallel indirect effect analysis, ethical leadership was related to less SI through increased perceived cohesion and decreased loneliness sequentially. Enhanced leadership training that effectively increases Soldier purpose may be an important primary prevention tool to mitigate the effect of suicide risk factors. This primary prevention strategy may help augment existing suicide surveillance and clinical prevention efforts to reduce Soldier risk for suicide.

KEYWORDS:

• Purpose in life
• leadership
• suicide
• army
• military

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Disclaimer

The material has been reviewed by the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research. There is no objection to its presentation and/or publication. The opinions or assertions contained herein are the private views of the authors, and are not to be construed as official, or as reflecting the true views of the Department of the Army or the Department of Defense. The investigators have adhered to the policies for the protection of human subjects as prescribed in AR 70–25.

Correction Statement

This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Military Operational Medicine Research Program.