Capstone- Veterans to Civilians: Communication and Culture Shock
-
Upload
anglsadvocate -
Category
Documents
-
view
52 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Capstone- Veterans to Civilians: Communication and Culture Shock
Running Head: COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 1
Veterans to Civilians: Communication Challenges and Culture Shock
Ashley Horton
Queens University of Charlotte
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 2
Abstract
The present study examines the role that Culture shock and Reverse Culture shock has on
Post 9/11 Veterans that have returned from a combat deployment to the U.S. The study
interviews U.S. veterans that have deployed to a combat zone for Operation Iraqi Freedom or
Operation Enduring Freedom (OIF/OEF) which includes smaller, related missions. The goal of
the study is to determine if the veterans interviewed have or are experiencing any communication
challenges as a result of Culture Shock and/or Reverse Culture Shock after deploying to a
combat zone such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuwait or Africa. This information will allow the study
to uncover some of the communication challenges veterans are dealing with, what issues might
be causing those challenges, what could be done to reduce the impact of said challenges, and
what might be done to prevent the same challenges from occurring in the future. During the
research process, it had been determined that Culture Shock has been defined similarly in
various studies whereas Reverse Culture Shock has not been studied as largely as its
predecessor. Reverse Culture Shock lacked sufficient research to contrast the current study
against, however, the definition of Reverse Culture Shock pointed out key symptoms and
behaviors that were relevant for the interviews and the purpose of this study. The study cannot
be generalized, but can be used to further examine what types of shock veterans are exposed to
and to broaden the scope in which Reverse Culture Shock is analyzed. Both theories lend
themselves to this study when testing the research question and analyzing the findings.
Keywords: Culture Shock, Reverse Culture Shock, Post 9/11, Veteran, Shock, Communication,
Challenges
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 3
Introduction
Culture Shock
According to Carne (2011), the origins of the Culture Shock theory are credited to
Kalervo Oberg. Dutton (2011) and Dutton (2012) examine Oberg’s studies thoroughly and
explained how much of Oberg’s research was based on social relationships and their impact on
individual’s, in particular immigrants, in a new cultural environment (p. 111-129).
In Carne’s (2011) research, it is determined that Oberg defined Culture Shock as
phenomena “… precipitated by the anxiety that results from losing all our familiar signs and
familiar social intercourse” (p. 177). Gaw (2000) supports this theory in his research by stating,
“Culture shock is primarily a set of emotional reactions to the loss of perceptual reinforcements
from one’s own culture, to new cultural stimuli which have little or no meaning, and to the
misunderstanding of new and diverse experiences.
The researchers’ studies concluded the Culture Shock, a result of one being immersed in
a new culture, could completely shock and change someone’s immediate well-being. There were
several significant emotional and physical changes that were noted in the Culture Shock studies
which are later defined by Gaw (2000) and Furnham (2011).
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 4
Symptoms of Culture Shock
Gaw (2000) further defines Culture shock as encompassing feelings of helplessness;
irritability; and fears of being cheated, contaminated, injured or disregarded” (p.13).
Adrian Furnham (2011) contributed specific symptoms experienced as a result of Culture
Shock which complement Gaw’s (2000) research. Furmham (2011) identified six notable
symptoms commonly identified in individuals experiencing culture shock. They are:
1) Psychological Strain
2) A sense of loss and feelings or deprivation
3) Feeling rejected or rejecting
4) Confusion and feelings of surprise
5) Anxiety
6) Indignation and impotence
The combination of studies on Culture Shock have found similar traits which help this study
determine if veterans are facing this phenomena as a result of returning from combat
deployments. Research suggests that Culture Shock may not be the only theory playing a role in
veteran’s difficulty transitioning and re-integrating in to American society.
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 5
Reverse Culture Shock
Reverse Culture Shock is similar to its predecessor, Culture Shock, with comparable
characteristics. However, the definition of Reverse Culture Shock confines this phenomena by
determining it happens to individuals that return to their home culture after being introduced or
immersed in to an entirely new culture for an extended period of time. An extended period of
time can be defined as six months or more for the purpose of this study.
Gaw (1995) defines Reverser Culture Shock as “…the process of readjusting, re-
acculturating, and re-assimilating into one’s own home culture after living in a different culture
for a significant period of time” (p. 2). The study conducted in 1995 focused on U.S. students
that studied abroad and, upon graduation, returned back to the U.S. and experienced what Gaw
(1995) defined as Reverse Culture Shock. Adler (1981) had begun to note symptoms that
accompany Reverse Culture Shock in his research such as “…academic problems, cultural
identify conflict, social withdrawal, depression, anxiety, and interpersonal difficulties (p. ?).
These symptoms align closely with that of Culture Shock which will be important to consider
throughout this study.
Gaw’s (1995) research, combined with Adler’s (1981), found other common
characteristics such as “…returnees have…been reported to experience alienation, disorientation,
stress, value confusion, anger, hostility, compulsive fears, helplessness, disenchantment and
discrimination” (Gaw, 1995, p. 3).
While Reverse Culture Shock has not been largely studied yet, Gaw (1995) acknowledges
that there is no correlation to depict who will be affected by Reverse Culture Shock and who will
not. It was assumed that there is no guarantee that any random returnee from a foreign culture
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 6
would be exempt from this phenomenon. Christofi & Thompson (2007) share the concern about
lack of research behind Reverse Culture Shock as they examine exchange students and their
disillusionment with their home country upon their return to their home country (p. 53).
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 7
Literature Review
Culture Shock and Reverse Culture Shock in Students
Arline Edwards-Joseph (2012) conducted a study on Caribbean students that experienced
Culture Shock and the study yielded five major themes that emerged with the same feelings
described in Furahm’s (2011) and Gaw’s (2000) research. Edwards-Joseph (2012) states the
emerging themes are “loneliness and feeling of not fitting in (alienation), anxiety and depression,
value systems and cultural differences, cultural identity, and environmental factors…emerged
from students who experienced culture shock (p. 716).
Another study conducted by Seiter and Waddell in 1989 was mentioned in Gaw’s (2000)
work. Gaw (2000) uncovered that during Seiter and Waddel’s (1989) study of students
reentering their home country…”studies suggest returnees possibly undergo identity changes
resulting from their intercultural experiences aside from normal maturation change” (p. 7) Siok
Kuan & Chng (2006) conducted studies that yielded similar results relating to identity crises (p.
464-465). This information complimented Gaw’s (2000) work on reentry difficulties amongst
students returning to their home country.
One example used in Gaw’s (2000) work was that of a Japanese family returning to their
home country. They suffered…”school phobia, adjustment [their] home country social
expectations (i.e. social rules and customs), fear of rejection, [possibility] of ridicule for being
“foreign” and performance anxiety” (p. 7). This type of dilemma was common amongst
returning students and it was reported that many tried to “maintain or trim aspects of themselves
learned in [the] new culture” (Gaw, 2000, p. 7).
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 8
Other changes that Gaw (2000) noted about students with Reverse Culture Shock were
“…physical changes, behavioral changes, interpersonal communication style changes, language
competence,…accent changes and career value changes” (p. 7). Gaw (2000) noted that many of
the students felt they “held different self-identities up returning to [their] home culture” (p. 8).
Thus resulting in the conflicts mentioned above.
Culture Shock and Reverse Culture Shock in Veteran Students
Many of the effects of Culture Shock and Reverse Culture Shock are witnessed in veteran
students that have been “…several years removed from [the] academic campus…[several] had to
take many remedial courses to get back up to speed” (Reynolds, p. 1). Colias (2013) interviewed
a male veteran that stated, “You feel you know all this stuff and it’s hard to listen to people
tell )you things…” The veteran said,” [I’ve] built up this idea in [my] mind that the civilian
world is going to be so much easier” the male veteran said (Colias, 2013). Gullahorn and
Gullahorn (1963) relate this type of expectation upon returning to one’s home culture as “…
expecting to return to an unchanged home as an unchanged individual” (p. 33-47). When those
expectations are violated, the person would then experience Oberg’s definition of Culture Shock
as previously defined. However, Gaw’s (2000) research suggests, that those who are more
cognitively prepared for the cultural differences….[they could] potentially minimize culture
shock” (p. 7).
With all of the potential challenges veterans face when returning to school in the U.S.,
service members described in Reynold’s (2013) study experience “…alienation among
classmates, [and] a sense of withdrawal” (p. 1). This results in “the alienation felt by many
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 9
student veterans…due to such publicity regarding the traumatic brain injuries and post-traumatic
stress disorder thousands have been diagnosed with…” (Reynolds, 2013, p. 1).
Carne (2011) studied Post 9/11 Veterans returning from war and their experiences when
returning to college. In the study, Carne (2011) noted that “Student veterans…may experience a
pattern of specific challenges related to common cultural experience. In PTSD and TBI veteran
transition publications and studies, culture shock or reverse culture shock is being used with an
almost expected intuitive or metaphoric understanding of the term, presenting no research about
the associated challenges culture shock or reverse culture shock presents for this group” (p. 2).
Putts (2014) examines the symptoms of PTSD and psychotic disorders and the symptoms share
an eerie resemblance to those of Culture Shock and Reverse Culture Shock (p. 83-89).
Abeyasinghe, de Zoysa, et al (2012) further analyze PTSD and compare it to various other
disorders, but acknowledge that there are other factors worsening the symptoms that are not
being studied. (p. 376-381).
Carne’s (2011) study “suggests veteran students [struggle] with reverse culture shock and
reintegrating their home culture while at the same time transitioning in to college…” (p. 6). Both
Gaw (2000) and Carne (2011) emphasize the lack of research done on Reverse Culture Shock; in
particular with veterans returning from war.
In Edwards-Joseph’s study (2012) there was evidence suggesting that those who chose to
go overseas for educational purposes might be less likely to experience Culture Shock or Reverse
Culture Shock. The implications for voluntary travel overseas by Edwards-Joseph (2012) also
suggest that one travels for personal growth (p. 717).
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 10
There may be a correlation with military veterans that voluntarily enlist into service for
personal growth versus individuals that chose to enlist to avoid a negative lifestyle or traumatic
experience. This has not been studied heavily before, but may be relevant in this study.
Edwards-Joseph (2012) did identify five stages of acculturation which support the
Reverse Culture Shock experience noted by Gaw (1995) and Adler (1985). These stages are:
1. Physical Changes
2. Biological Changes
3. Cultural Changes
4. New Set of Relationships
5. Psychological and Behavioral Changes
This study will examine if returning combat veterans experience all or none of these
phenomena and to what degree. Challenges with these stages can relate back to Culture Shock
and Reverse Culture Shock. Pendersen (2004) supports this notion by observing “…a
psychological concern, characterized by symptoms such as anxiety, depression, sleeping
problems, fatigue, irritability, loneliness, forgetfulness, nostalgia, and feelings of not fitting in.”
This has often viewed as characteristics of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in veterans
returning from war.
Edwards-Joseph (2012) continues to explain that these changes are “results from external
changes and differences in the physical environment such as climate, food, transportation…
believed to be the pioneer of the concept of culture shock” (p. 719).
Culture Shock and Reverse Culture Shock on Post 9/11 Veterans
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 11
Colias (2013) explains that “…because the federal government invested millions of
dollars in to their training, one would think experienced combat veterans would be ideal
candidates to fill jobs. But when they leave the military, many find themselves struggling to find
work, taking lesser paying jobs or any menial work where they can find it” (p. 23). Colias
(2013) interviewed a female veteran who described her experience transitioning in to the civilian
world as “…a really poor transition. The [government] show them how to put on suits, but they
don’t really help them identify the types of jobs they can do” (p. 23).
Colias (2013) identified that the issue re-integrating back in to society was…”most acute
for veterans in their early to mid-20s. Most were not even old enough to enlist…the problem
seems to be a combination of youth, lack of education and lack of work experience outside the
military” (p. 23). Where the Culture Shock and Reverse Culture Shock theories do not
specifically identify any age group to be particularly prone to shock, age may be of relevance in
this study.
Communication Barriers for Post 9/11 Veterans
Resnik & Allen (2007) look deeper in to other forms of communication challenges that
may be related to shock in some form. The researchers explain,” Redeploying home can be
challenging and many veterans have readjustment issues such as marital difficulties, financial
difficulties, alcohol or substance abuse problems, medical problems, and behavior problems such
as depression or anxiety…” (p. 991).
Resnik & Allen (2007) touch on the concept of reintegration and the merging of veterans
back in to the civilian communities. The researchers note that “Community reintegration can be
viewed as the return of individuals to their age, sex, and culturally appropriate role function…
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 12
activities integral to the successful fulfillment of social roles, that together, speak to the extent of
an individual’s reintegration in to society” (Resnik & Allen, 2007, p. 992).
For the purpose of this study, reintegration (in to society) is defined as an individual
being placed in to their expected social roles as defined by Resnik & Allen in 2007 (p. 992). The
ability for a veteran to reintegrate after returning to the U.S. from a combat deployment show
“limitation in attention and ability to learn [which] can affect all areas of life, including ability to
live independently, be employed, be in school and drive” (Resnik & Allen, 2007, p.996). Thus
resulting in challenges to be placed back in to the same social roles a veteran may have held prior
to their military service.
In the study, Resnik & Allen (2007) focus on specific areas of a veteran’s life to see what
has been affected or what has changed since returning from their deployment(s). Interpersonal
relationships showed significant amounts of difficulty with veterans who experienced physical
and emotional trauma suffering from high frustration levels, poor anger management skills,
impaired ability to perceive social cues and impaired social pragmatics (p. 1000). Veterans in the
study were noted as experiencing frequent social isolation, apathy and withdrawal from others
(Resnik & Allen, 2007, p. 1000).
Another aspect of communication that was affected for veterans was a noticeable
inability to share or contribute emotionally, emotional distance, and the expression that
maintaining old and new friendships difficult (Resnik & Allen, 2007, p. 1000). “I guess I don’t
have the same interests that everybody else would. I can’t seem to get used to what I used to
be…used to like talking about with my friends or family...” explained a female veteran in Resnik
& Allen’s (2007) study (p. 1000).
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 13
Relating all of the above to Culture Shock and Reverse Culture Shock, it seems plausible
that the unmet expectation of being unchanged faced with the expectations of one’s home culture
can produce the same symptoms as the theories of shock as defined above. It’s relevant that
PTSD, traumatic brain injuries, and other physical injuries are exacerbated by these
circumstances, but there is evidence that Culture Shock and Reverse Culture Shock could be
impacting veterans more severely than previously believed. There is not enough research on this
particular subject at this time, but is suggested for further investigation in future studies.
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 14
Research Question
Based on the literature review above, the following research question is tested:
What communication challenges are vets facing after returning to the U.S. from a combat
deployment (OIF/OEF specifically)? Why?
The RQ examines what challenges veterans feel they are experiencing and relates those
experiences to the definitions and symptoms defined for Culture Shock and Reverse Culture
shock. This will allow the researcher to determine if either type of shock is present and if there is
a correlation between the experiences described and any key points during the veteran’s
deployment or return to the U.S. The question is built upon the research on both kinds of shock
as well as shock experienced by national and international students as well as the small amount
of research suggesting that Culture Shock may be present in combat veterans. This can be
measured by comparing and contrasting the answers given by the vets against the research on
each type of shock.
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 15
Methodology
Objective
The objective of this study was to examine the communication challenges faced by Post
9/11 combat veterans and to determine if their challenges have a relationship with Culture Shock
and Reverse Culture Shock. The literature review on both types of shock strongly suggested that
veterans could be experiencing minor to severe shock when entering a foreign country and
returning to the U.S. The literature further suggested that Culture Shock and Reverse Culture
Shock can inhibit one’s ability to communicate effectively as a result of experiencing shock
symptoms.
For the sake of the study, the participants will be veterans that served in an
overseas combat deployment post 9/11 in any branch of service, regardless of age, gender, race
and religion. A combat deployment will be defined as a veteran having served overseas in
OIF/OEF and/or smaller missions related to these combat deployments. This definition will not
require that veterans have actually encountered physical combat such as firefights, hand to hand
combat, and other violent encounters. There are other aspects of a deployment and military
training that can inhibit one’s ability to be an effective communicator once returning to the U.S.
Participants
A sample of ten Post 9/11 combat veterans was recruited via Facebook, Twitter, email
and referral to volunteer for a one-on-one interview with the researcher. The research developed
a script to recruit the volunteers online. A follow-up script was created and sent after each of the
participants had interest in participating. The script specifically asked the veteran to specify if
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 16
they were a Post 9/11 combat veteran to ensure the appropriate candidates were being selected
for the study.
The veterans were not discriminated against for gender, ethnicity, age or branch of
service. The participants had to be able to volunteer of their own free will without the assistance
of a care giver or supervisor in order to ask questions specifically related to communication
issues that are not caused by a noticeable physical and/or cognitive disability. Many studies have
focused on the physical impact on the brain and body to cause physical and/or cognitive
communication challenges whereas this study will explore the less obvious issues related to
communicating.
Procedure
The researcher submitted an IRB Exempt application to the IRB board at Queens
University of Charlotte to approve the scripts, questions, and validity of the study. Once the IRB
approved the application, the script to recruit volunteers was placed on Facebook and Twitter.
Veterans that applied were asked to share their full name, phone number and email. The
researcher confirmed receipt of the volunteer’s information and informed the volunteer they
would need to send three dates and times to meet with the researcher in person or via Skype.
Once the date and times were received, the researcher scheduled each interview in hour long
intervals per volunteer. A confirmation email with the date and time was sent the night before the
scheduled time of the volunteer to remind them of the meeting and to ensure there would be
participation. The volunteers also received a copy of the Informed Consent document to read,
sign and send back prior to the interview. A copy of the IRB Exempt application, informed
consent, and interview questions can be found in the appendix.
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 17
The veterans were contacted directly by the researcher to conduct the interview. All of
the interviews were done via Skype per request of each veteran. The interviewer informed the
veteran that they would be reviewing the informed consent together to ensure the veteran had an
understanding and was able to ask questions or withdrawal from the study if they desired to.
Prior to beginning the questions for the interview, the researcher verified that they were
the only person in the room, there was no one else that could hear the conversation, the doors
were closed and locked and all information would be placed in to a locked safe and the
researcher was the only one able to access the information. The researcher explained to the
veteran that they would be the only person knowing the veteran’s identity and explained they
would have confidentiality with the information they shared. The researcher asked each veteran
if they understood or if they had any questions. The interviews did not begin until the veterans
acknowledged full understanding of the Informed Consent and the nature of the study.
The veterans were asked prequalifying questions asking them verbally if they were a Post
9/11 combat veteran. If any were to answer no, they would have been disqualified and the
interview would have been concluded. All ten of the veterans were Post 9/11 combat veterans,
they shared the year they were deployed, how many deployments they served, what branch, age,
gender and additional demographic questions.
Once the demographic portion was complete, the interviewer moved on to the nine
questions created for the study. The researcher defined what communication was based on the
study so the veteran would have a mutual understanding. Each veteran was told they could ask to
have the question rephrased, any word defined, or the question restated at any time.
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 18
The veterans had the opportunity to talk as little or as much as they wanted to answer
each of the nine questions. At the end of the questions, the researcher asked the veteran if the
veteran if they had any additional information they wanted to share in relation to the questions
that were previously asked. Once the opportunity to ask questions was concluded, the researcher
asked each veteran if they would agree to be contacted if further information was needed from
them. The researcher reminded them that they could ask for a debriefing and review of the study
once it was complete.
The participants must be able to volunteer of their own free will without the assistance of
a care giver or supervisor in order to ask questions specifically related to communication issues
that are not caused by a noticeable physical and/or cognitive disability. Many studies have
focused on the physical impact on the brain and body to cause physical and/or cognitive
communication challenges whereas this study will explore the less obvious issues related to
communicating.
Risks
There are no known risks to the participant. The researcher did acknowledge there may have
been unforeseeable risks as noted in the Informed Consent form. The researcher identified
hotlines and 911 as an alternative if the veteran needed any kind of assistance or help at any
time. The veteran was reminded of these resources before conducting the interview. These
resources can be found listed in the Informed Consent in the Appendix.
The veteran could have experienced uncertainty about a question in the interview which may
or may not have triggered certain symptoms (i.e PTSD). The interviewer reinforced at the
beginning of the interview that they do not need to answer any question they don’t feel
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 19
comfortable with nor are they expected to endure any mental or physical stress. None of the
veterans expressed any discomfort or issues with mental or physical triggers during the
interview.
The veteran was allotted the opportunity to provide any information related to assistance they
may need in case it becomes necessary and the researcher may act in accordance with their
needs.
Analysis
The researcher used the prequalifying and demographic information to determine the
average age of the veterans, the average number of years spent in service, and charted the
frequency of how many tours were served and during which years were the tours served by each
veteran.
The researcher used the information collected from each veteran to find commonalities in
communication challenges, to see if any specific barriers could be identified, and to determine if
culture shock or reverse culture shock was a factor in the veteran’s challenges to communicate
with others. This will allow the researcher to determine if there can be any suggestions for
further research and/or improving communication challenges with veterans.
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 20
Findings
Demographics
A total of ten Post 9/11 combat veterans were interviewed. Two interviews were done via
phone due to technical difficulties and the remaining eight were conducted via Skype. The
veterans that were interviewed had deployed to an overseas combat zone between 2004 and
2011; the years deployed varied for each veteran. A total of six veterans said they volunteered
for the deployment(s) whereas four felt they did not volunteer. The veterans that said they did
not volunteer expressed that they were in the military prior to the U.S. declaring war on terrorism
and received orders saying they had to deploy rather than being given the option. Due to the
nature of the U.S. military being an all-volunteer force, the question as to whether one
volunteered could be deemed irrelevant for this study. The findings were calculated with simple
statistics where it was applicable.
The average age for the veterans was 28.4 with the ages ranging from 28 to 47. A total of
seven veterans identified themselves as Caucasian, one as Alaskan/Native American and two as
other. A total of eight veterans served in the United States Marine Corps and two in the army.
One identified that had re-enlisted from the Marine Corp in to the Air Force. The average time in
service was 10.7 years served. The countries deployed to were Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuwait, East
Africa and the border of Jordan and Syria. The average number of deployments overseas was
two with the minimum being one deployment and the maximum being four. The location of each
veteran was not identified to ensure confidentiality and the location of the veteran’s current
residence was irrelevant for this study.
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 21
Themes
A total of nine questions were asked and several themes emerged. The themes are as
follows:
Question 1
What expectations did you personally have (prior to being trained) about the culture you
were deploying to prior to reaching that destination?
a. Follow-up Question: Where did you deploy to? (If not mentioned)
The veteran’s had anticipated deploying to a third world country and explained they third
world meant poor and underdeveloped. The extent of how underdeveloped was unknown. A few
veterans also identified they thought the residents of the foreign country would be brutal or like
savages that were ready to kill anyone.
Question 2
What expectations were you taught to have about the culture by the U.S. Military during
training?
The veterans identified a variety of things they learned through the military before being
deployed in a to a foreign war zone. The veterans identified being taught the basics about the
countries religious and personal customs, what the culture would be like and how it was different
from the U.S., basic language relative to the country they were deploying to, and how they were
supposed to perceive the residents of the territory they were deploying to.
One interesting development was that eight out of ten veterans had been taught to
perceive the people overseas. Veteran number 7 said,” [We were] taught to consider everybody
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 22
our enemy. We were taught to be courteous and respectful, but assume everyone there was
trying to kill us.”
Whereas, Veteran 5 said,” [We were taught that] these people are regular people, not
every person in Afghanistan wants to kill you. They want to live their life and be left alone.
Don’t treat everyone like an enemy.”
The contrasting difference between the education the two veterans, and other veterans,
received seemed to have changed as veteran 7 had served his deployments much earlier on in the
war whereas veteran 5 experienced her deployment several years later. The two types of
educational thought about the people varied between each veteran.
Question 3
Did the culture you were deployed in differ from your expectations that you knew or
learned?
a. Follow-Up Question: If yes, what was different?
Two out of ten veterans expressed that their experience when arriving to the foreign war
zone did not differ from what they had expected. The remaining eight veterans agreed their
experience differed from their expectations. Veteran 3 expressed,” Looking back, it seems like
the country is just full of people doing the best that they can in a bad situation. I don’t necessarily
think everyone is set out to be bad people, but when their family members get killed…they want
revenge on who kills your family just like anyone would…in particular an invading country.”
Veteran 5 also expressed that during her deployment she felt,” They just want to be your
friend and know everything about you.” She said she was surprised that,”…they were so sweet
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 23
and loving.” Veteran 5’s experience refers to encounters with the females of Afghanistan more
so than men.
All of the veterans were surprised at how under-developed and poor the countries were
and how poorly the women were treated in each of the countries. All but one veteran felt the
people were more educate than they had anticipated. The remaining veteran felt the people he
met were very uneducated.
Question 4
What expectations did you have (personally) about what home would be like for you
once you returned from your combat deployment?
All of the veterans expressed that they didn’t think going home would change or be any
different from the way it was when they left for their deployment. In regards to what the veterans
thought wouldn’t change, all shared the idea that they would be the same person with their
family and friends and they would be able to go back to work and pick up where they left off. A
few veterans admitted they knew some things might be a little different, but they weren’t sure
what.
Question 5
What expectations did the military teach you to have about home post deployment?
There was a unanimous opinion from the veterans that the married vets received more attention
and help to prepare for going home and readjusting with their families. Only two of the veterans
were married when they returned from their deployment and the remaining eight were single.
The two married veterans said they were told to expect their families to be able to function
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 24
independently since the family had been on their own for so long. They were also told to
understand there will need to be a period of adjustment to allow the spouses and children to get
reacquainted with the veterans again.
The single veterans expressed that they received little to no help transitioning and
understanding what changes they should expect once they returned to the U.S. The single
veterans said they had short debriefings, mainly about finances and a few documents about the
Department of Veterans Affairs, but all said none of the information was helpful or significant to
them.
Question 6
Did your experience at home differ from the expectations you held before returning back
home?
a. Follow-up Question: If yes, what was different?
One veteran provided significant information that will be further discussed in the analysis
portion of this study. Veteran 3 stated,” I didn’t care for the stuff they [military personnel] told
my wife to expect.” Veteran 3 shared that his wife had been told to avoid communicated about
anything related to the deployment which made them both feel as if they were walking on
eggshells.
Veteran 3 said,” …if they told you not to say those things then why are we married if we
can’t communicate anymore? I wasn’t happy with what they asked her to do. We weren’t happy
on either end.”
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 25
Other veterans said they noticed differences in their personalities and there were things
others noticed and had to point out to them. Many expressed their surprise as to how hard it was
for them to readjust to being back in the U.S. Veteran 2 expressed,” Being immersed in the
culture for so long and coming back…it was a real shock.”
Question 7
Since returning home from your combat deployment(s), have you experienced any of the
following emotions?
1) Anxiety
2) Depression
3) Isolation
4) Irritation
5) Anger
6) Self-doubt
7) Fear
The veterans reported feeling some degree of all of the symptoms. A few identified
feeling the symptoms prior to deployment, but the symptoms worsened after they returned to the
U.S. None of the pre-existing symptoms disappeared upon returning to the U.S.
Question 8
Do you feel you are better able to make personal connections (i.e. personal or
intimate) since you’ve returned from your deployment?
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 26
a. Follow-up Question: If no, what makes you feel that you are not better at
doing this?
Only two vets said they were better able to make personal connections successfully after
their deployments and one stated they felt they had become better at it. Most found that they had
experienced, or are experiencing, challenges and have no idea why there is a problem.
Veteran 7 stated,” I feel worse at it. The [military] makes you get the job done; nobody
has time for small talk. It’s all about what’s going on and how is it getting done; that’s it.
Everything is treated this way and I think it bled in to my social abilities. We’re so brass and
crass in the way everybody [in the military] delivers their message.”
One vet did state that seeking out and actively participating in therapy has helped his
ability to connect with others to a small degree.
Question 9
Prior to returning home from a combat deployment and reflecting on your
experiences being home post deployment, do you feel there is something you could
have benefited from to help you transition back home more easily?
a. Follow-up Question: If yes, what do you think helped you make an easy
transition back home?
b. If no, what do you think would have helped you?
All of the veterans stated they would have wanted someone to talk to, such as an
advocate or another combat veteran, which could relate to their experiences and offer helpful
advice. Interactive role playing was suggested by a few veterans as well so they could practice
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 27
how to respond to various situations at home much like they did when preparing to deploy to a
war zone.
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 28
Discussion
The purpose of this section is to analyze and discuss the findings in order to answer the
research question and determine any implications about shock and its effect on veterans.
When analyzing the demographics, one’s age during the deployment may have played a
role in how well one readjusted back to the culture in the U.S. During the interview, Veteran 3
felt that those veterans who were older had a greater sense maturity and understanding to be able
to cope with the shock and recover at a faster rate. This particular sentiment was not tested for
this study, but could be used to determine if there is a difference in age, maturity and
readjustment for future studies.
There was a significant difference in the perceptions and attitudes about the foreign
culture when studying the veterans who had deployed closer to 2003 versus the veterans that
deployed closer to 2011 and beyond. Those who went into a combat zone closer to 2003 to 2006
felt the war was the most intense and held more negative views and perceptions about the culture
and anticipated a more hostile environment. Those who deployed closer to 2010 and 2011
declared they were more open minded as to what they would encounter overseas and didn’t feel
as negative about the culture they were deploying to. It is possible that these attitudes over
various timeframes could be related to Obama’s efforts to remove military personnel from war
zones and end all of the existing wars overseas. This particular subject could be tested in future
studies.
The themes that emerged in questions one, two and three were related to what the veteran
had expected to experience when deployed to a combat zone, what they were taught to expect
and what they actually experienced once arriving to their designated location. In contrasting the
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 29
themes, a majority of the veterans had expected the countries to be poor, slightly under-
developed, and not very civilized. The veterans were shocked by how impoverished the country
was once they had arrived and it was worse than what they had expected. The military taught the
veterans some of the values that each culture held and basics about the language so they could
communicate independently if needed. The veterans didn’t know what to expect about personal
and religious customs. The veterans stated the military did its best to train them on what to
expect with cultural norms so the veterans could be as diplomatic as possible while still
performing their required job responsibilities.
All of the veterans said they were taught to be courteous and respectful, but those who
deployed closer to 2003 were taught to view everyone as the enemy that is trying to kill them.
This sentiment still echoed in the veterans continued thoughts about the country they deployed
to. Those that deployed closer to 2011 were taught not to trust everyone, but not to treat
everyone as the enemy. This sentiment was less common among the veterans. The veterans
stated that these views had drastically changed over the course of the war and could also be
reflective of the efforts to pull troops from overseas war zones. Perceptions on how the views
about war have changed over the last 12 years could be studied further at a later date.
All of the veterans felt that what they had expected about their deployment(s) rang true
once arriving to their designated combat zone. However, they were all surprised to some degree
by the hospitable nature of the local residents as well. Only some of the veterans actually
experienced hostile forces overseas, but all were taught to expect a violent environment at all
times. The veterans views of a hostile combatant was what they were taught to expect and that
expectation was only met some of the time and under extreme circumstances such as a suicide
bomb, military assault, and other various forms of combat outside of a normal, civil interaction.
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 30
It could be suggested that the expectations of some of the veterans were violated which may have
caused Culture Shock to some degree.
Questions four, five and six analyzed what the veterans personally expected when they
returned to the U.S., what they were taught to expect, and if their experience upon returning
home met their expectations or not. The most common theme from all of the veterans was that
they all felt that nothing would be different when they returned to the U.S. During the interview,
Veteran 6 stated,” I thought it was going to be like a vacation or a party every single time.”
Veteran 7 expressed,” I was expecting everybody to be there. I was expecting to really enjoy my
life after going through some really hard times.” Veteran 10 shared similar sentiments,” I thought
I would have been able to transition normally…that I’d just come back and everything would
pick back up where I left off.”
However, only a few veterans actually felt like most of their expectations had been met
upon returning home. A majority of the veterans expressed that when they returned to the U.S.
that everything was different for them and in ways they did not expect. This is where some of the
veterans felt their problems and challenges with communication had started. It can be suggested
from the evidence in contrast with the research on shock, that the veteran’s expectations about
returning to the U.S. was violated therefore Reverse Culture Shock set in.
Another important trend to contrast was what the military taught the veterans to expect
when going home. Only two out of ten veterans were married during their deployment, but all
ten veterans felt that there was a heavy emphasis on helping married veterans transition and
adapt to their lives at home whereas the single veterans were given little to no information to
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 31
prepare for their reintegration. This was seen as a major problem when each of the veterans,
married and single, reflected on their education about returning home.
Based on the discussions with each of the veterans, they felt they received an intense, but
necessary, amount of information about the country they were going to deploy. All of the
veterans felt they did not receive the same amount of information going home. The veterans
expressed they were taught about culture, customs and lifestyles overseas and about what kind of
personal and group expectations they should have to go on a deployment and be effective. The
veterans felt that while not all of their expectations were the same when they were overseas, they
felt prepared and less shocked by what they experienced. Therefore they felt they were better
able to transition in to the new culture and perform their required duties for their job.
The difference in how they were trained to go home was a huge issue for a majority of
the veterans. The amount of training received by each veteran was different, but all of them
expressed it wasn’t enough. Veteran 4 stated,” The [military] didn’t really teach [me] anything…
I got a lot of outside opinions, but nor formal teaching about what to expect. You go through a
month of readjustment training and get told to be a normal citizen and to control your anger.
You get told don’t freak out and don’t do what you did in combat. That’s about it.”
Veteran 3 said,” We were told that nobody owes us anything. I don’t think they [military]
did a good job at all about setting expectations coming back. I was a little older and mature….I
wonder about the young guys who have never been away from home and were sheltered and now
have to come back.”
Veteran 10 shared similar sentiments,” They put us through some classes on getting back
in to the civilian life. Not helpful. They talked about finances, how to deal with it…a lot didn’t
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 32
apply to me because I was single at the time; most of it was directed towards married guys. They
talked about how to deal with wives and kids and not to expect to go back to the way things were
before. A veteran also said he felt the debriefings they received were directed towards married
military members as well and found the information useless.
These sentiments were expressed in all of the interviews and in summarizing these
responses it appears that lack of training and preparation has had a huge impact on the veteran’s
communication thus creating challenges that could have been avoided. Not having the
appropriate expectations and training has led to surprise, confusion, anxiety and fear once the
veterans returned home. These are all significant characteristics of both types of shock.
In looking at the definition of Culture Shock and Reverse Culture Shock, it does appear
that the pre-transition back to the U.S. could have been more effective had the veterans been
taught what to expect and how to readjust. The veterans feeling that their home life had changed
and everything was different reflects the idea of losing what was once familiar to them as stated
in the literature review on the two types of shock.
Addressing the symptoms and known characteristics of shock in advance may have
lessened the negative impact on the veteran’s abilities to communicate with their loved ones,
friends, and families. This is a subject that could be tested in future studies.
As a result, the veterans felt there was a lack of readjustment training and proper
education on things like shock, a majority expressed feeling symptoms of PTSD which closely
relate to the symptoms identified in the research on Culture Shock and Reverse Culture Shock.
Analyzing PTSD and its symptoms in comparison to shock are suggested for future studies.
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 33
Question seven listed the seven most common characteristics for shock to see if there’s a
correlation between shock and the veteran’s challenges after returning to the U.S. Nine out of
ten veterans said they experienced anxiety after their deployment. If any expressed having
anxiety prior to their deployment, they all stated it was worse upon returning to the states. Six
out of ten veterans felt depression to some degree. Each veteran varied on how frequent they felt
depressed and how intense the feeling was. All of the veterans that felt depression said it was
only present after their deployment.
Seven out of ten veterans experienced isolation either by isolating themselves from others
or feeling isolated by others. All of the veterans felt some form of isolation only after their
deployment. Isolation can lead to symptoms such as anxiety, communication apprehension,
irritation, anger and depression. Nine out of ten veterans felt irritation and all of them stated it
was noticeably worse after their deployments. Eight out of ten veterans expressed increasing
amounts of anger after their deployments. Some stated they felt some degree of anger prior to the
deployment, but it was more prominent after returning to the states.
Seven out of ten veterans said they experienced self-doubt, but did stated they did not feel
it was specifically related to the deployment. Several of the veterans expressed that self-doubt is
just a part of life and they wouldn’t consider it to be a problem. Finally, three out of ten said they
felt some degree of fear that they had not experienced prior to deploying. For the purpose of this
study, fear could have been defined more clearly to better determine if it was or was not a
symptom being experienced.
The results found in question seven would suggest that the symptoms reported by each of
the veterans could have been present prior to the deployment, but regardless of pre-existing
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 34
symptoms, anything the veteran experienced was significantly greater post-deployment. Some of
the veterans suggested they felt their symptoms faded after a lengthy period of time. Lengthy
was not defined by the veterans. The evidence found does support that none of the symptoms
listed disappeared after a deployment therefore the symptoms were new or exacerbated at some
point during and/or after the deployment. This information supports the idea that culture shock
and reverse culture shock are present and can possible worsen the symptoms of PTSD and other
psychiatric conditions for veterans.
Question 8 analyzed how the veterans felt about their ability to communicate and connect
with others in personal and intimate relationships. Two of the veterans expressed they were
better able to make relationships; one sought help through therapy and the other expressed a deep
desire to connect and learn how to do it better. The remaining eight felt they had more of a
problem connecting with others and many felt they didn’t know or understand why.
Veteran 1 stated,” I feel kind of distanced from people because I can’t relate with them as
much.” This thought was a common theme among the eight veterans that felt they have been
struggling with communication and relationships. All of the symptoms listed in question seven
were related to how the veterans felt they were unable to communicate. Many expressed anxiety
when trying to talk to new people and depression when they feel they have failed at being useful
or needed by others. Feeling isolated from others often causes the veterans to disconnect and
avoid communicating and therefore isolating themselves. Many veterans felt heightened
irritation and anger when trying to communicate with non-military people and other symptoms
listed were triggered as a result. This supports the research question in that there are existing
communication challenges as a result of improper training and the presence of Culture Shock and
Reverse Culture Shock.
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 35
Finally, question nine asked the veteran to identify anything he or she felt would have
been helpful to them to make the transition back to the U.S. easier and possibly reduce the
amount of communication challenges they have been or are currently facing. Many of the
veterans suggested they would have liked to role play to practice how to respond to situations
with family and friends.
Veteran 4 talked about role playing to prepare for his combat deployment and how much
it had helped him be ready to do his job. Many of the veterans expressed this may have helped
them understand the types of changes they would be faced with and they thought they would
have been less surprised. Other veterans expressed the desire to have a fellow combat veteran or
advocate available to talk to them instead of hotlines and strangers at the doctor’s office. Veteran
5 expressed,” There were no real resources for people struggling. You basically had to do it on
your own. When you’ve never felt these things before or have never been through this before…
you don’t want to just call someone and say Hey, I want to kill myself. You don’t WANT to call
somebody. I wish I had an advocate, someone to talk to.”
All of the responses given by the veterans are implicative about the types of symptoms
they are experiencing, what is triggering the symptoms, and how they do or don’t cope with the
issues. The findings in question nine further support the presence of Culture Shock and Reverse
Culture Shock in veterans returning from a combat deployment.
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 36
Conclusion
In conclusion, the research and evidence found during the study strongly suggest that
Culture Shock and Reverse Culture Shock symptoms are present in veterans that return from a
combat zone and are significantly related to the communication challenges veterans are faced
with as a result. While not all of the challenges veterans cope with are related to or a result of
Culture Shock, it can be suggested that the characteristics and symptoms of shock can exacerbate
any other condition the veteran is dealing with. As some of the studies in the literature review
suggest, preparing individuals for their return to their home country or state has helped them
prepare, cope, and anticipate change which reduces the likelihood of experiencing shock. It can
be recommended to further study the impacts of shock on veterans and implement training and
education for the veterans before returning home to decrease the chances of experiencing shock
and to improve their overall well-being by removing additional stressors on other possible issues.
Limitations
One limitation is the study is not generalizable. The sample size used is not meant to
generalize shock and veterans, but can be used as a foundation to produce further research on
this subject. Another limitation was the time allotted to conduct the interviews and the research.
While the information found during the study is useful and implicative of Culture Shock, more
time allotted to conduct more in-depth interviews and follow-up meetings could have enhanced
or changed the results of this study.
Cost and location is a limitation as all of the veterans lived in a variety of locations across
the U.S. The researcher did not have the financial ability to travel to each of the veterans and
some of the veterans could not financially travel to the researcher resulting in Skype and
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 37
telephone interviews. However, the cost of the phone calls could not be compensated and in-
person interviews could have yielded more significant results.
Recommendations
It is recommended that this study be continued and focused more specifically on Culture
Shock and the time before the veteran returns to the U.S. The hope is to identify specific areas in
the veteran’s training that are lacking or ways the training could be improved to help the
transition when returning home. Further studies may be able to identify more specific triggers,
events, or situations that could be addressed when implementing Culture Shock training post-
deployment.
A final recommendation is to study veterans that have already returned from a combat
deployment and elaborating on the questions provided and developing additional questions to
gain more specific information. The hope is to find ways to reduce the impact of shock and
decrease the stress being placed on the veteran while they are readjusting to their home
environment.
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 38
References
Abeyasinghe, N. L., de Zoysa, P.P., Bandara, K.C., Bartholameuz, N.A., & Bandara, J.J. (2012).
The Prevalence of Symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder among soldiers with
amputation of a limb or spinal injury: A Report From a Rehabilitation Centre in Sri
Lanka. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 17(3), 376-381.
Adler, N. J. (1981). Re-entry: Managing Cross-Cultural Transitions. Group & Organizational
Studies, 6, p. 341-356.
Carne, G. (2011, January 1st). Coming Back to College: Middle East Veteran Student
Involvement and Culture Shock. ProQuest LLC,
Christofi, V., & Thompson, C. L. (2007). You Cannot Go Home Again: A Phenomenological
Investigation of Returning to the Sojourn Country After Studying Abroad. Journal of
Counseling & Development, 85(1), 53-63.
Colias, M. (2013). Unemployed Veterans. Illinois Issues, 39(6). 23.
Dutton, E. (2012). Culture Shock and Multiculturalism: Reclaiming a Useful Model from the
Religious Realm. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Pub.
Dutton, E. (2011). The Significance of British Columbia to the Origins of the Concept of
“Culture Shock”. BC Studies, (171), 111-129.
Furnham, A. (2010). Culture Shock: Literature Review, Personal Statement and Relevance for
the South Pacific. Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, 4(2), 87-94.
Doi:10.1375/prp.4.2.87
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 39
Gaw, K. F. (2000). Reverse Culture Shock in Students Returning From Overseas. International
Journal of Intercultural Relations, 24(1), 83-104. Doi:10.1016/S0147-1767(99(0024-3
Gullahorn, J.T., & Gullahorn, J.E. (1963). An Extension of the U-curve hypothesis. Journal of
Social Issues, 19(3). 33-47.
Joseph, A., & Baker, S.B. (2012). Themes Caribbean Overseas Students Perceive Influence
Their Levels of Culture Shock. College Student Journal, 46(4), 716-729.
Liu, J.H. (2011). Commentary on Furnham’s Culture Shock, Berry’s Acculturation Theory, and
Marsella and Yamada’s Indigenous Psychopathology: Being A Call to Action for Pacific
Rim Psychology. Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, 5(2). 75-80.
Doi:10.1017/S183449090000060X
LI, D. (2012). Culture Shock and Its Implications for Cross-Cultural Training and Culture
Teaching. Cross-Cultural Communication, 8(4), 70-74. Doi:
Pendersen, P. (2004). 110 Experiences for Multicultural Learning. Washington, D.C.: American
Psychological Association.
PR, N. (2012, November 9). Post 9/11 Veterans’ Returning Home; Thousands At Risk of
Poverty, Unemployment. PR Newswire US.
Putts, M.R. (2014). Recognizing Trauma and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Symptoms in
Individuals With Psychotic Disorders. Journal of Counseling & Development, 92(1), 83-
89.
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 40
Resnik, L., & Allen, S. (2007). Using International Classification of Functioning, Disability and
Health to understand challenges in community reintegration of injured veterans. Journal
of Rehabilitation Research & Development, 44(7), 991-1005.
Reynolds, C. (2013). From Combat to Campus. Chronicle Of Higher Education, 21.
Seiter, J.S. & Waddell, D. (1989). The Intercultural Reentry Process: Reentry Shock, Locus of
Control, Satisfaction, and Interpersonal Uses of Communication.
Siok Kuan, T., & Chng, R. (2006). Revisiting the Cultural Identity Model: Sojourners’
Negotiations of Identity and Consumption Experiences. Advances in Consumer Research,
33(1), 464-465.
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 41
Appendix
Chart 1
Participant Details
Gender
Age
# of Deployment
sYears
DeployedVolunteer
StatusTime in Service
Veteran 1
Male 29 1 2007 Yes 8
Veteran 2
Male 28 2 2006, 2010 Yes 8-Present
Veteran 3
Male 47 2 2006, 2007 Yes 29
Veteran 4
Male 29 2 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010
Yes 8
Veteran 5
Female 28 1 2011 Yes 7.5
Veteran 6
Male 29 3 2003, 2005, 2010 No 12-present
Veteran 7
Male 33 3 2003, 2005, 2006 Yes 12
Veteran 8
Male 33 1 2003 No 4
Veteran 9
Male 41 1 2004 No 17.5
Veteran 10
Male 28 1 2004 Yes 6.5
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 42
Table 1
Veterans Age RangeAge # of Veterans47 141 133 229 328 3
Graph A
47
41
33
29
28
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Age of Participants
Series3Series21
Total # of Veterans in Age Group
Ages
Avg. Age: 28.8
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 43
Table 2
Number of Deployments Served Per Year
Year # of Deployments
2003 32004 22005 22006 32007 32008 12009 12010 22011 1
Graph B
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20110
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Number of Deployments Served Per Year
1 Deploy.2 Deploy.3 Deploy.
Year Deployed
# of Deploy-ments /Year
Avg. # of De-ployments: 2
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 44
Table 3
Ethnicity
Types # of Veterans
Caucasian 7Alaskan/Native American 1Hispanic/LatinoAfrican AmericanOther 2
Graph C
Caucas
ian
Alaska
n/Nati
ve Ameri
can
Hispan
ic/Lati
no
African
American
Other0246
Ethnicity
Series1
Types of Ethnic Background
# of Participants
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 45
Table 4
Question 7 ResponsesSymptoms Yes No
Anxiety 9 1Depression 6 4Isolation 7 3Irritation 9 1Anger 8 2Self-doubt 7 3Fear 3 7
Graph D
Anxiety
Depression
Isolation
Irritation
Anger
Self-doubt
Fear
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Question 7 Responses
NoYes
# of Veterans Responding to Symptoms
Sym
ptom
s Ex
peri
ence
d
COMMUNICATION AND CULTURE SHOCK HORTON 46
Graph E
9
1
Gender
MaleFemale