Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Armed Forces & Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (7)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by King, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Word of Command

Communication and Cohesion in the Military

Anthony King

University of Exeter a.c.king{at}exeter.ac.uk

Military sociologists have attempted to explain how military institutions develop and maintain high levels of social cohesion. They have focused primarily on how the personal and intimate social interactions between soldiers produce bonds of comradeship. This comradeship is taken as the basis of social cohesion. Although sustainable, there is an unfortunate bias in the work of military sociologists. They focus almost exclusively on informal rituals in which personal bonds are forged. In fact, the decisive rituals that bind military groups together are the formal processes of training. Drawing on ethnographic analysis of the British armed forces and the Royal Marines, in particular, this article attempts to redress the balance. It examines the drills—above all, the communication drills—that British troops are collectively trained to perform and claims that these constitute the key social rituals for the British military. On the basis of this analysis, an alternative account of comradeship is proposed

Key Words: social cohesion • primary groups • communication • Royal Marines

Armed Forces & Society, Vol. 32, No. 4, 493-512 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/0095327X05283041


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Armed Forces & SocietyHome page
C. Kirke
Group Cohesion, Culture, and Practice
Armed Forces & Society, July 1, 2009; 35(4): 745 - 753.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Armed Forces & SocietyHome page
A. King
The Existence of Group Cohesion in the Armed Forces: A Response to Guy Siebold
Armed Forces & Society, July 1, 2007; 33(4): 638 - 645.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Armed Forces & SocietyHome page
G. L. Siebold
The Essence of Military Group Cohesion
Armed Forces & Society, January 1, 2007; 33(2): 286 - 295.
[Abstract] [PDF]