Diagnosis and treatment of combat stress reaction: Current attitudes of military physicians

Iris Manor*, Rami Shklar, Zhava Solomon

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


This study examined the attitudes of 203 Israel Defense Forces (IDF) military physicians regarding the causes and treatment of combat stress reaction. The findings indicate that subjects tended primarily to endorse situational rather than predispositional explanations for the causation of the CSR. They attributed the highest levels of responsibility for treatment to the frontline physician and to commanders, and the least amount of responsibility to the casualty himself. These findings suggest that military physicians do not hold CSR casualties responsible for the causation or the treatment of the stress reaction. CSR is now viewed within the "medical model." It is considered by doctors to be within the purview of medicine and CSR casualties are considered legitimate objects of medical concern. The stigma attached to the phenomenon in the past thus appears to have diminished considerably.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)247-258
Number of pages12
JournalJournal of Traumatic Stress
Issue number2
StatePublished - Apr 1995


  • Israel Defense Forces
  • causation
  • combat stress reaction
  • treatment


Dive into the research topics of 'Diagnosis and treatment of combat stress reaction: Current attitudes of military physicians'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this