Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 305

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Review of Research on Moral Injury in Combat Veterans

Frankfurt, Sheila, Frazier, Patricia·2016·Military Psychology
DOI 10.1037/mil0000132
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The moral injury construct has been proposed to describe the suffering some veterans experience when they engage in acts during combat that violate their beliefs about their own goodness or the goodness of the world. These experiences are labeled transgressive acts to identify them as potentially traumatic experiences distinct from the fear-based traumas associated with posttraumatic stress disorder. The goal of this article was to review empirical and clinical data relevant to transgressive acts and moral injury, to identify gaps in the literature, and to encourage future research and interventions. We reviewed literature on 3 broad arms of the moral injury model proposed by Litz and colleagues (2009) Litz, B. T., Stein, N., Delaney, E., Lebowitz, L., Nash, W. P., Silva, C., & Maguen, S. (2009). Moral injury and moral repair in war veterans: A preliminary model and intervention strategy. Clinical Psychology Review, 29, 695–706. 10.1016/j.cpr.2009.07.003[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]: (a) the definition, prevalence, and potential correlates of transgressive acts (e.g., military training and leadership, combat exposure, and personality), (b) the relations between transgressive acts and the moral injury syndrome (e.g., self-handicapping, self-injury, demoralization), and (c) some of the proposed mechanisms of moral injury genesis (e.g., shame, guilt, social withdrawal, and self-condemnation). We conclude with recommendations for future research for veterans suffering with moral injury.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/mil0000132

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 46 references

Cited by

See all 305

Metadata

Authors
Frankfurt, S., & Frazier, P.
Venue
Military Psychology
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2016-06-09
Volume
28
Issue
5
Pages
318-330
ISSN
  • 0899-5605 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7876
DOI
10.1037/mil0000132
OpenAlex
W2401248473
Cited by
305
References
46
FWCI
27.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Review of Research on Moral Injury in Combat Veterans. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/mil0000132
The paper
Frankfurt, S., & Frazier, P. (2016). A Review of Research on Moral Injury in Combat Veterans. Military Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/mil0000132

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.