Gender differences in reported potentially morally injurious events among post-9/11 U.S. combat veterans, using two measures.

Abstract

Military experiences that violate one's sense of right and wrong (i.e., potentially morally injurious events [PMIEs]) may result in moral injury, characterized by shame, guilt, demoralization, self-condemnation, and social withdrawal. The objective of this study was to examine gender-related differences in the rate of reporting PMIEs. Secondary analyses were conducted on a previously collected longitudinal cohort study of postdeployment functioning among U.S. post-9/11 combat veterans in Central Texas (N = 406). As part of the parent study, participants completed two measures of PMIEs-the Moral Injury Events Scale (MIES; Nash et al., 2013) and the Moral Injury Questionnaire-Military Version (MIQ-M; Currier et al., 2015). Gender differences at the item response level were analyzed in a series of Bayesian multilevel item response theory models. The most frequently endorsed responses on both the MIES and MIQ-M for both men and women were never or strongly disagree. On the MIQ-M, more veteran men endorsed experiencing PMIEs to some degree. On the MIES, more veteran women endorsed strongly agree to betrayal items. Veteran men and women reported any PMIE occurring at relatively high rates. Gender differences at the item response level were found for most items on both the MIES and MIQ-M, albeit of small magnitude. Awareness of gender differences in the likelihood of experiencing a given PMIE may help inform clinical assessments and case conceptualizations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).