RESILIENCE AS A FACTOR OF MILITARY PERSONNEL’S PSYCHOLOGICAL READINESS FOR COMBAT MISSIONS

Abstract

The article is devoted to a systematic analysis of resilience as a key psychological resource in the professional activity of military personnel under conditions of combat, uncertainty, and heightened threat. At the theoretical and methodological level, it substantiates the shift from a narrow instinctive interpretation of mental stability toward a dynamic, multidimensional model that integrates motivational, cognitive, emotional-volitional, and socio-resource components of psychological readiness. The paper traces the historical evolution of the concept—from its early mentions in the natural sciences to its integration into psychological research in the second half of the 20th century—and highlights the contribution of E. Werner and R. Smith’s longitudinal studies in identifying individual, familial, and environmental determinants of resilience. Contemporary definitions of the phenomenon (APA; approaches of G. Bonanno, J. Wagnild and H. Young, K. Cherry) are summarized, with emphasis on terminological distinctions within Ukrainian scholarship (resilience as a process vs. resilience as a trait), which have implications for measurement and intervention. The organizational and applied dimension is examined separately: the institutionalization of positive psychology principles in the Comprehensive Soldier Fitness (CSF) program, which encompasses five domains of well-being (emotional, social, family, spiritual, physical) and combines screening procedures with training modules for soldiers and their families. The article demonstrates that resilience performs a protective function against post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, and depression, enhances self-regulation, balanced decision-making, and combat performance under pressure. At the same time, it incorporates a critical sociological perspective, addressing the risks of normalizing “high stress” and the pressure to conform to the idealized image of the “perfect soldier,” underscoring the need for ethically and contextually sensitive implementation of resilience-building programs. Based on a synthesis of theoretical sources, the article substantiates a systemic approach to resilience development that combines individually oriented interventions (self-regulation training, enhancement of self-efficacy, coping skills), reinforcement of social support (unit, family, community), and optimization of the organizational climate (leadership, psychological support, standardized assessment tools). The practical significance lies in defining priorities for the psychological training and rehabilitation of military personnel, as well as proposing criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of such programs at different stages of service. The study concludes with the assertion that resilience should be integrated as a strategic resource into doctrines of preparation, support, and post-stress recovery of personnel, contributing to the preservation of mental health, increased professional efficiency, and sustainable functioning in combat and crisis conditions.