Religiosity and Support for the use of Enhanced Interrogation

Religiosity and Support for the use of Enhanced

Interrogation

Chapter 1: Introduction

The topic of this study concerns the influence of religiosity and support for the use

of enhanced interrogation. This study was conducted due to confusion between torture

and interrogation, unclear and misleading data collection and reporting on public opinion,

and the importance of the cohort studied to this and future research on this topic. The

study’s implications for positive social change arise from recognition of changing of

religious values among young adults between the ages of 18 and 34 and the impact this

has on their support for interrogation policy.

Throughout the course of human existence, religion has been a common theme in

societies. It serves as a source of inspiration, explanation, and social control that has

influenced societal development and direction (Boudon & Bourricaud, 1989). From the

earliest practice of ceremonially burying of the dead by the Neanderthals during the

middle to late Pleistocene epoch (2.6 million to 11,700 years ago) to its newest forms,

religion continues to define and direct human behavior and interactions around the world

(Gargett, 1999). Religion has become a major aspect of society and culture around the

world and, in the United States, it has had a measurable influence on the views, opinions,

and values of citizens (Malka & Soto, 2011). The commitment and reverence toward

religion in the United States can be found in many places. From the Pledge of Allegiance

(1954–present) to U.S. currency, and in inscriptions or markings on any number of

official landmarks around the country, phrases such as “In God We Trust,” “God who

gave us life gave us liberty,” and “this nation under God” greet entrants. Therefore, it

should be of no surprise that religion is recognized as a major factor that directs human

behavior and governance in the United States. Because of this national impact of

religious doctrine on everyday life, it should be a consideration in policy making (Streib

& Hood, 2011). While religion is not part and parcel of the political process in the

United States, as can be found in a theocracy, it has been observed by scholars that

“(certain) aspects of religion are still influential” in secular decision making (Scott, 2000,

p. 95). Maintaining the integrity of the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of

the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is of paramount importance to the

government. This is necessary to preclude any perception of religious favoritism by the

government despite indications of its influence.

The dynamics behind social motivation reviewed for this project have been

studied by sociologists and economists within the frameworks of choice theory, rational

choice theory, and rational action theory; in these inquiries, the influence of religiosity

has limited if any mention. Additional studies have focused on the basic structure of

society, psychological conditioning, rewards based theory, and rational choice theory

have also been conducted; however, none of these have led to conclusions as to why

individuals gravitate toward religiosity, thus inviting further research into the field (Scott,

2000).

The gap in research directly measuring the influence of religion on the population

of interest in this study (18-34 year olds with current or past military experience) and

members of this population’s opinion on the use of enhanced interrogation, coupled with

the lack of a body of knowledge concerning the same, represented an opportunity to

explore the personal dimension of individual human motivation by looking for social

political behavior indicators within the complex dimension of religion. This dimension

may not be overt until concern is broached with regard to a public policy that may

conflict with religious teachings, such as enhanced interrogations.

Although it is often confused with enhanced interrogation, torture is discussed as

part of this project due to the vast amount of literature on the subject. Furthermore,

clarity is necessary in order to differentiate between the two in light of the ubiquitous

euphemistic use of the term enhanced interrogation by politicians and the media when

referring to torture. The use of torture is prohibited by law; therefore, the question of

policy concerning it is straightforward—it is illegal. This study is not about torture.

However, due to corollaries made between torture and enhanced interrogation, it is

crucial to identify the differences between enhanced interrogation (what this study is

about) and torture (what this study is NOT about). The discussions that follow are

intended to prevent obfuscation as to the differences between types of torture and types of

enhanced interrogation and to distinguish the two for purposes of this academic study,

with due consideration of the argument by some that they are one in the same.

Torture as a means of achieving involuntary capitulation has been used throughout

recorded history. However, due to the ability for both torture and enhanced interrogation

to elicit an emotional response, the subjectively identifiable colloquialism “I know it

when I see it” will not apply when referring to torture or enhanced interrogation for this

study. Instead, the objective definitions supplied by scholars in the literature will be used

for both, starting with torture.

Historically, the well documented types of torture presented in the literature have

included the following: judicial or evidential, punitive, interrogational, dehumanizing,

terroristic/deterrent, and sadistic (Wisnewski & Emerick, 2008, p. 7). The use of torture is

prohibited by U.S. and international law and is not the subject of this study. However, it

is important to note that current and persistent political circumstances and passionate

emotional rhetoric have clouded a distinction between the two, which creates concern in

an academic discussion. For example, the detainees held at Abu Ghraib (2003-2006)

were ultimately tortured when the guards overstepped their legal bounds. The detainees

were held to determine whether they possessed useful information concerning threats

against the United States. However, the treatment they subsequently endured was later

deemed to have been conducted as a result of their captors’ liberal interpretation of their

mission and as such a violation of the law. Consequently, those involved were convicted

of criminal offenses (Reid, 2005).

For the purpose of this study, enhanced interrogation is any interrogation

technique or approach, or any treatment related to interrogation, that is indicated for use

in the U.S. Army Field Manual—Human Intelligence Collector Operations (September

2006) to include the six techniques identified in the media in 2005 as having been

instituted in “mid-March 2002” (Ross & Esposito, 2005, p. 2). Therefore, the distinction

between what occurred at Abu Ghraib and enhanced interrogation has become clouded.

While the need for interrogation remains relevant, the need to do it in a legal and

socially acceptable manner is the challenge. One of the issues facing socially responsible

enhanced interrogation policy is the motivation behind the popular approval of such

techniques. Finding acceptable political doctrine and theory to drive this is a challenge

and requires taking a look across multiple disciplines. Motivation theorists suggest that

decisions to support enhanced interrogation policy are motivated by secular beliefs,

religious beliefs, or some other influential motivator that people believe will move them

closer to self-actualization as individuals and institutions (Maslow, 1943).

While individuals might subscribe to and follow the teachings of a certain

religion, the magnitude of the motivational influence on their decision making can be

multiplied if endorsed by a popular or charasmatic religious leader (Barrett, 2001).

Becoming sympathetic to this influence, whether a conscious decision or not, can be a

foundational component of an individual’s decision making process when faced with

making a value based judgement in support of positive social changes in institutions,

behaviors, or policy. This external influencer should be recognized when the decision is

marked by conflict between religious values, utilitarian logic, and/or personal

selfinterests.

The argument for consideration of religious motivation is the premise upon which

this study is founded. It’s importance not only lies within it’s significance to the

individual and culture but also due to the sparcity in the literature with regards to the

influence on opinions relevant to enhanced interrogation policy. The need for this study

is the consistent and profound absence in the literature of a link between the religious

dimension of individuals, enhanced interrogation policy, and military service. Previous

researchers have identified this as a gap and encouraged more research to determine the

importance of this measure on enhanced interrogation policy. This gap was reported to

be “not that uncommon when measuring citizens’ opinions on matters of public policy,”

in the U.S. Public Opinion on Torture study (Gronke et al., 2010, p. 439). Despite the

study’s title, it addressed the lack of duality between torture and enhanced interrogation

to exemplify how public opinion is shaped by omission and misrepresentation, resulting

in inaccurate reporting on actual public opinion. For example, the data indicated that

public approval of the use of enhanced interrogation techniques increased across 32

different polls and surveys reviewed when descriptors other than the word torture were

used (Gronke et al., 2010, p. 439). Furthermore, there was no indication of consideration

for the impact of individual moral or religious beliefs on individual support for torture of

suspected terrorists in these studies despite its being a known political motivator and

predictor of support. This was highlighted in the CNN program Cafferty File concerning

the PEW Research Center findings that religiosity influences support for torture

(Cafferty, 2009). In that survey, PEW measured religiosity by frequency of church

attendance and found that 54% (n = 742) of frequent church attenders supported the use

of torture whereas 42% did not, adding further evidence to support a potential link (PEW,

2009c).

Throughout the literature the limited consideration of religion as an influence on

people’s opinions on torture and interrogation represents an opportunity to enhance the

public’s knowledge concerning social policy. The need to contribute to closing this gap

is of great significance to the population studied here, and this study may therefore

contribute to positive social change. Information revealed by this study is of importance

to U.S. Armed Forces leadership and religious programs personnel. This was revealed in

the responses of U.S. Armed Forces personnel who served in Iraq in 2006 and

participated in the “U.S. Public Opinion on Torture, 2001–2009” study (Gronke et al.,

2010, p. 439). The results of this study indicate that two thirds of the military members

polled opposed torture, while one third of the same group supported its use. This

provides an indication that social change policy is needed in regard to their understanding

of and adherence to U.S. and international laws that expressly prohibit torture (Gronke et

al., 2010, p. 440).

Other significant studies relevant to this project were conducted by the Pew

Research Center (PEW) and the International Red Cross (IRC). The data from these

studies validated a Reed College study revealing a complex and multidimensional

interaction among religion, torture, and enhanced interrogation policy (Pew Research

Center, 2009). These studies serve as a convenient means of identifying public sentiment

on significant milestone events that unfolded during the Global War on Terrorism. For

example, findings by PEW in its Religion and Society report (2009) came shortly after the

November 2008 Senate Armed Services Committee’s Inquiry into the Treatment of

Detainees in U.S. Custody was published (U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee,

2008). Their findings were consistent with and validated public support of the findings

made by the Congressional inquiry. Among the findings and recommendations of

Congress, the report concluded that a lack of supervision and liberal interpretation of

enhanced interrogation techniques directly led to the abuse and killing of prisoners in

detention facilities at Abu Ghraib, Bahram, and elsewhere. In response to this, numerous

individuals were charged with crimes and military leaders were relieved of command.

This culminated in the White House releasing Executive Order 13491 (EO 13491)—

Ensuring Lawful Interrogations (January 22, 2009). President Barack Obama’s EO

13491, which added emphasis to the findings of the report, sent a clear message that any

interrogation activities must stay within the bounds of a lawful interrogation in addition

to specifically prohibiting all forms of liberal interpretation. In the December 2014

release of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence: Committee Study of the CIA’s

Detention and Interrogation Program, significant need for positive social policy change

was identified by the Chairman with regard to future policy on the matter. However, it

was noted that the EO mentioned above is not U.S. law, could be overturned by a future

president, and would better serve if it were law (U.S. Congress, 2014, p. 4).

The polls and reports published by PEW, the IRC, and others, when coupled with

the findings of independent scholars, government committees, and others within the

international community presented throughout the literature reviewed demonstrates the

need for clarity of national values on enhanced interrogation in order to institute positive

social change. This begins with understanding individual values and how they arise

through religiosity. Understanding the difference between lawful and unlawful

interrogations and the influence of religion on individuals was this study’s attempt to

establish and better understand a potential link between religion and motivation. The link

among individual decisions, religion, and enhanced interrogation policy remains

conspicuously elusive, and further exploration is indicated.

Background of the Problem

Throughout the research literature reviewed, arguments both for and against the

use of physical pressure and nonphysical means getting information from terrorist

suspects is prevalent. For example, as stated in the findings and conclusion of the Senate

Select Committee on Intelligence: Committee Study of the CIA’s Detention and

Interrogation Program report, “the CIA itself determined from its own experience with

coercive interrogations, that such techniques ‘do not produce intelligence,’ and ‘will

probably result in false answers,’ and had historically proven to be ineffective”

(Congress, 2014, p. 3).

Because of the time limited value of national security threat information, legally

obtaining strategic information from detainees and prisoners of war who are otherwise

reluctant to capitulate has been a challenge for years. During this time, interrogators have

come up with many techniques designed to sway the interrogated into giving up

information they would otherwise choose to withhold. Traditionally, the techniques

developed and used have included both verbal threats and applied physical distress. Both

have been used interchangeably in an effort to obtain information or to reveal whether or

not a given suspect is guilty of a crime (Gray & Wegner, 2010).

The recent historical foundations of these practices in the United States can be

traced back to the wartime experiences between Native Americans and Europeans during

the colonial period and settlement of North America some 500 years ago (Knowles,

1940). During this time, the United States were settled and influenced by a mix of

European cultures whose members explored Central and South America, the Caribbean,

and ultimately North America. These early colonizers brought with them not only the

customs and traditions of their own unique cultures, but also a historical and experiential

understanding of the techniques used in gathering information from captives of war and

ensuring the pacification of conquered individuals (Knowles, 1940; Ruiz, 2002). These

information gathering practices were proven and well known, as they had been used to

facilitate the consolidation of power in Europe over the past 1,000 years. Imported to the

Americas and used by both Spanish and French missionaries, these techniques were

instrumental not only in the exploration and settlement of the New World, but also in the

sometimes forceful conversion and assimilation of the natives (Ruiz, 2002). These

practices exemplify the role of religion in generating the political authority of the time,

not through the humanitarian concerns of reformists, but through the exercise of power by

force (Foucault, 1977). This exercise of power has been sustained today both

symbolically and literally, ranging from the use of religious iconography and phrases to

theocratic forms of government whose officials dole out punishment in accordance with

religious law. Evidence of this can be seen in the United States as citizens are faced with

persistent images and reports of violence inflicted upon individuals from around the

world as a result of both natural and manmade disasters and wars, some of which are

directly or tacitly attributed to the application of religious doctrine.

In contrast to the reported drop in religiosity that occurred in the 1990s, over the

last decade more and more people in the United States have been turning to religion for

answers (Russell, 2013). Hassner and Horowitz (2010) recognized in their research a

growing increase in the relevance of traditional religion worldwide that is “rooted in the

past” (p. 207) and “destined to shape the future” (p. 207), representing the far reaching

and tenacious appeal of religion.

The influence and growth of religion in the United States have expanded and

contracted as a result of social, cultural, and personal desires over the past several

decades (Lipka, 2013). As a result, there has been an increase in the volume of political

activity both in defense of and in opposition to the use of the enhanced interrogation from

conservative nonprofits, religious based groups, and others. Identified groups of interest

whose members consider themselves nonreligious and unaffiliated are known as the

Nones, indicative of individuals with no ties to a traditional religious group and

individuals who collectively or independently practice “spirituality.” Some scholars

hypothesize that those who are not religious would be more inclined to make enhanced

interrogation policy decisions based on an evolutionary moral compass guiding their

opinion as to what is right and what is wrong, leaving religion out of the decision making

process (Churchland, 2011). However, other researchers conclude that “it is dubious to

distinguish religion from spirituality, and that spirituality cannot be universally defined as

a set of particular values or motivations, in the same way that other value types can”

(Pargament, 1999, p. 168). While these views may be generalized to a major religion,

they are also linked to the culture, which, in turn, is governed by the laws of the society.

The religion of the culture may or may not be that of the majority, and as such a distinct

corollary between the religious population and subsequent law and policy support for the

use of enhanced interrogation cannot be established (Johnson & Grim, 2013).

Some might assert that semantically, religion and spiritualty are the same. Those

without a religion who consider themselves as spiritual do so apart from the organized

religious establishment. This is characterized not as a rejection of belief in a divine

power, but as a rejection of belief in the interpretation of the divine power from an

intermediary whose views they may or may not share. Research into the influences on

enhanced interrogation policy that includes the views of the Nones may prove

challenging. Individual beliefs, taken without doctrinal guidance from an ordained

religious leader, might not provide an accurate indication of the beliefs of a group as a

whole if the source of foundational motivation is not accounted for (Pargament, 1999).

Therefore, understanding the importance placed on the religious or spiritual tradition by

an individual results in an understanding of the impact that this association can have on

motivation, which was an essential consideration in the development of this study. This

was a concern not only because of the impact on the individual’s perception and

understanding of interrogation policy as related to a higher power, but also because of the

universal nature of the motivation. Individual motivations such as these are described in

Locke’s theory of moral motivation and moral permissibility and Kant’s universal law of

nature and critique of practical reason. The constituent parts of highly spiritual, devout, or

intense religious beliefs coalesce and make up the whole of the person; therefore, it is

indeed the individual’s opinion, as a constituent part, that matters most and is a

foundational premise that this study explored (Hommel & Colzato, 2010).

While for some the concepts of religion and spiritualty are axiomatic, there is no

comprehensive definition of religion or spiritualty, nor is there a common methodology

for studying them that is universally accepted (Swatos & Kivisto, 1998). For the purpose

of this study, the following definitions meet the spirit and intent of their use in terms of

responsible social policy and enhanced interrogations.

The most generally accepted definition of religion in the literature comes from

Geertz. Religion is defined by Geertz as a system of symbols that acts to establish

powerful, pervasive, and long lasting moods and motivations in men and women by

formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and clothing these conceptions

with such an aura of factuality that the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic

(Geertz, 1973, p. 24).

Defining spiritualty also has its challenges. In Spirituality: A Glowing and Useful

Term in Search of a Meaning, the use of this term is said to have been a more “recent

invention,” with no historical references to the term prior to the 1980s (Bregman, 2006, p.

8). According to Yob (2011), spirituality is identified as a component of religion in that

“religion has shaped and been shaped by the spiritual experience but religion does not

have exclusive rights to spirituality and in fact must work diligently to prevent losing it”

(Yob, 2011, p. 5). Furthermore, evidence is offered in support of the motivational

premise of this study by from Abraham Maslow’s Religions, Values, and Peak

Experiences as a corollary. In this work, Maslow concludes that “spirituality was not a

possession of the church but a natural phenomenon” (Yob, 2011, p. 5).

As an intuitive premise of this study, it is obligatory for policy makers to heed the

interplay of religion as an influence on personal decision making and a motivator toward

positive social change. An example of the impact from this interplay was quantified in a

2003 report by the Fetzer Institute’s National Institute on Aging Working Group entitled

Multidimensional Measurement of Religiousness/Spirituality for Use in Health Research.

This report identified 12 domains of religiousness and spirituality that were essential and

had positive impacts on both physical health and social wellbeing that resulted in

changing the community studied. The domains of religiousness and spirituality in this

study were chosen based on “the strength of their conceptualization and theoretical or

empirical connection to health outcomes” and positive social change that resulted (Fetzer,

2003, p. 10). The domains measured in the report included daily spiritual experiences,

meaning, values, beliefs, forgiveness, private religious practices, religious/spiritual

coping, religious support, religious/spiritual history, commitment, organization

religiousness, and religious preference and were used to develop of the Brief

Multidimensional Measure of Religiousness/Spirituality (BMMRS; Fetzer, 2003;

Masters, 2013). The evidence in this report has “elicited considerable attention from

researchers in other fields,” and for policy makers, the results provide evidence of the

potential impact that religious and spiritual affiliation have on issues of social and

political significance such as enhanced interrogation policy (Fetzer, 2003, p. 10). The

influence and impact of these domains of religious influence were recognized early in

2001. As a result, in 2001, the Bush administration created the White House Office of

Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships (Executive Order 13199), and later the

Obama administration amended the executive order to change its name to the White

House Office of Faith Based and Community Initiatives, which served the additional

purpose of ensuring continuity with the constitutional separation of church and state

(Bush, 2001; Obama, 2009). Discussion of spirituality and the “Nones” phenomenon is

included as anecdotal evidence of other potential influences in addition to religiosity that

were not measured in this study.

While the individual’s decision on enhanced interrogation remains personal, the

decision is motivated by something. As such, it can be a challenge to quantify and apply

the same motivation to a larger group. While there is research in the literature indicating

that attempts to isolate and measure motivation have been a challenge, it is not

impossible. One of the challenges in measuring an individual within a group is the

influence of group sentiment on the individual, a phenomenon studied by social

psychologists. Sources of influence on groups include sermons, politically motivated

rallies, public speeches, and other group events and can result in crowd phenomena. As

this study involved a convenience sample of U.S. Armed Forces personnel as a group

consisting of a diverse collection of individuals who shared membership, obligations, and

benefits, the results were not individualized.

This crowd phenomenon can create spontaneous ambivalence in otherwise

resolved conflicts within the individual based on the general mood of the moment and

susceptibility of the individual to change. Speakers (religious, political, media, or

otherwise) can knowingly use this to their advantage and purposefully influence

sentiment on public policy in this manner. For religious leaders, the call to service results

in individuals joining an organization in order to potentiate and pontificate the spiritual

and religious teachings of that group. The intent is to improve the lives of individuals,

promote the functioning of society, and achieve the betterment of mankind. The message

is typically conveyed through a prepared sermon or individual counsel. Each religious

denomination or spiritual following comes with its own propensity toward social issues,

including enhanced interrogation policy, which slant members’ orientation toward

motivation to action in one direction or another. As an example, Weithman, in Religion

and the Obligations of Citizenship, argued that the impact of this influence on religious

commitment and civic participation is profound and politically influential, “extending

beyond the narrower political realm in which decisions about the use of coercive state

power are made,” indicating that religious doctrine should always trump state policy

(Kunzman, 2005, p. 160). While this may seem an extreme example of religious

influence on social policy, it demonstrates the consistent and tenacious nature of religion

and how it can influence an individual’s decision making process. In the book Under

God? Religious Faith and Liberal Democracy, the author cautioned against blind

devotion and encouraged introspection while encouraging a thoughtful melding of

religion and politics (Perry, 2003).

Acknowledging the presence of religion in government and respect for the

political separation of church and state, a representative premise in the literature

concerning decision making grounded in religious teachings, was summarized by

Kunzman (2005) as follows: “a citizen would not violate the morality of liberal

democracy if her only reason for advocating or voting for policy that restricted others’

freedom was her interpretation of religious scripture” (p. 163). The influence of group

affiliation and where it exists on the religious spectrum is a necessary consideration in

quantifying its influence on individual motivation. This exemplifies how individual

support for social policy may be acceptable if literally influenced by religiously guided

politics.

Upon completing an overview on the impact of religious and spiritual influences

from the perspective of an organized group, it is necessary to consider those who fall

within the realm of religious and spiritual as individuals. These individuals who reside

outside of traditional institutions are referred to as unaffiliated. According to a Pew

Research Center 2012 report, the growth of the religiously unaffiliated in the United

States continues to rise. The report indicated that large segments of the population are

“less religious than the public at large on many conventional measures,” with 33 million

people reported as having no affiliation. This report includes data on a growing segment

of the military whose members do not identify with a particular religion. As reported by

the Navy Times, citing a Department of Defense report, 1 in 5 active duty service

members do not identify with a particular religion (Myers, 2014). These results parallel

those in the 2008 Pew Research report Religious Affiliation: Diverse and Dynamic, which

also stated that 1 in 5 Americans report no religious affiliation. However, these reports

do not take into account the findings of the American Piety survey conducted by the

Baylor Institute for Studies of Religion. In this study the researchers found errors in their

methods. The Baylor study reported an “undercounting of evangelicals” and “a fair

number of those who claimed no religion” in the sample surveyed who “were actually

active, engaged affiliates of Evangelical congregations” suggesting bias and errors in the

literature (Dougherty, Johnson & Polson, 2007, p. 25). Due to this reported bias in the

data concerning the growth of religion and the errors and omissions in reporting

religiosity, data should be reexamined. The data should be considered within the context

of the entire U.S. population and not solely on the reports provided by the religious

denominational leaders, whom the Baylor report implies the results were skewed in their

favor. According to the Hartford Institute for Religion Research: Fast Facts about

American Religion, Gallup polls consistently report 40% of Americans attend church on

a weekly basis, however less than 20% actually do adding further indication of the need

for more research on the matter (Hadaway & Marler, 1998).

Taking all these factors into consideration and in seeking emphasis for a

strategically selected cohort, the target population for this study were U.S. citizens, 18-34

years old, with current or prior military service. There are several reasons for this

exclusion criteria, most importantly are uniqueness and relevancy. They represent

Millennials or Generation-Y cohort, who were identified in the report Millennials in

Adulthood: Detached From Institutions, Networked With Friends as those who range in

age from 18 to 33. The high end of this range was rounded up to 34 in this study to

account for variances in the upper age limit as referenced in other sources (Pew Research

Center, 2014, p. 4). The intent of the study was to generate data specific to this group

that would be relevant to future study of this cohort in similar or related social or policy

context. This group has spent the majority of their childhood living in and subsequently

serving in the military during the longest war in the history of the U.S. There have also

been a myriad of unique and powerful social influences on this generation that make them

an interesting cohort. These include being exposed to around the clock media coverage

of events in real time, such as coverage of the terrorist attacks of 9/11/2001, the

ubiquitous political debate surrounding the use of enhanced interrogation, as well as

television and radio broadcasts of religious services. Lastly, the importance of this cohort

was emphasized by researchers in a study conducted by Life Way Christian Resources.

In that survey, 1,200 18-29 year olds revealed that they were less likely to participate in

organized religion and were skeptical of religious institutions, with 72% of these

individuals self-described as being “more spiritual than religious.” This provides further

indication of a move away from organized religion as an institution and as such validates

the longitudinal findings of the PEW Research Center on the matter (Pond, Smith, &

Clement, 2010). The research has shown a trend among the members of this generation

away from affiliation with the larger religious traditions, and in fact away from any

affiliation at all. Collectively, they self-report a propensity toward embracing a

nonspecific spirituality. As this trend of moving away from religiosity grows, the data

related to their support for the use of enhanced interrogation are likely to follow in one

direction or another. For example, a survey conducted by the American Red Cross

showed that 59% of American youth and young adults validated their support for

enhanced interrogation. Furthermore, 41% of respondents stated that it was “permissible

for American troops to be tortured overseas,” indicating a possible shift away from the

widely held concept of American exceptionalism by this group (Rose, 2011, p. 204).

While this survey’s focus was on what Americans think of international humanitarian

law, the researchers stated, “one phenomenon that has surprised many observers has been

that of the opinions expressed by Americans about torture over the past decade,” which

have “demonstrated a significant disparity between the perceptions of Americans’ support

for torture as presented by journalists and politicians and the conclusions reached as a

result of polling data analysis” (Gutierrez, DeCristofaro, & Woods, 2011, p. 1014). This

disparity provides fertile ground for research into how the traditional influence of religion

affiliated organizations on public policy may result in positive social change. For

example, some of the more prominent religion affiliated organizations that may be

influential in this regard include Focus on the Family, the Jerry Falwell Ministries,

Liberty University, the Christian Broadcasting Network, the Alliance Defending

Freedom, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the American Family Association, the

Family Research Council, Concerned Women for America, the Faith and Freedom

Coalition, and the Council for National Policy, all of which will be impacted in the future

by this cohort who make decisions regarding policy support from the outside of these

organizations.

It is clear from this research that motivation concerning what moral and ethical

reference should be used as the basis for decision making in the absence of traditional

religious guidance is unclear. What is clear is the movement away from the traditional

influence these organizations have on the youth of today when compared to the youth of

50 years ago. This movement is in contrast to the relative growth in congregational size,

which has instead been largely attributed to the growing immigrant population in the

United States (Hadaway, 2011). Researchers have long explored the effects of religion

and its association with the development of attitudes toward torture and political

preferences (Malka & Soto, 2011). What has been shown by this research is that active

participation in a religion and/or practicing spirituality results in positive outcomes for a

person’s overall health and social engagement and leads toward positive social change.

However, research on how individuals’ religious beliefs influence their position in

debates on interrogating captives for information is still lacking. This is because

measuring religious belief is complex and subject to change depending on the context of

the survey used (Davidson, 1983; McAndrew & Voas, 2011).

The use of physical pressure to obtain information from captives is well

documented throughout history from a military, social order, and religious perspective.

The literature addresses the military use of and consequent conventions against abuses

such as the Geneva Conventions and the United Nations Conventions Against Torture.

To maintain social order and as a method of obtaining confessions, the use of

imprisonment, public ridicule, and the prospect of death have been prevalent throughout

history. The influence of religion on the use of such methods was found to be

understudied in the literature from the perspective of this study, although it was well

represented as a force behind moral decision making. Being properly acquainted with the

impact of religion on the decision making processes regarding enhanced interrogation at

the individual level promotes a deeper understanding of why one is either for or against

such views and is why this study is needed.

Problem Statement

The purpose of this study was to explore religiosity in the context of how it may

influence individual support or opposition to the use of enhanced interrogation on

terrorists and members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

A unique dimension of significance to this end can be understood by recognizing that the

age group studied here represents the largest segment of those serving in the uniformed

military services. By virtue of this service, they act as proxies of the state within the

auspices of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and Laws of War. Despite the fact that

the U.S. Armed Forces is an all-volunteer force that entices individuals to service through

patriotism, vocational training, and other incentives, all males in the United States

between the ages of 18 and 25 are required by law to register with the Selective Service

System, which would make military service compulsory in times of dire need. For those

who serve, their status as service members has the potential of increased exposure to

terrorism and terrorist activities by those who oppose U.S. foreign policy. Furthermore,

some service members assigned as security and enforcement forces are faced with the

task of applying enhanced interrogation techniques, whether they serve as part of the

reserve component on active duty or not.5

This research focused on religiosity and how that may influence an individual’s

support or rejection of the legal use of enhanced interrogation as represented by a sample

of current or former U.S. Armed Forces personnel. The PEW Research Center found a

growing number of young Americans reporting no affiliation with traditional religious

organizations along with simultaneous growth in religion worldwide (Barrett, 2001;

PEW, 2012). However, there was no indication in this report of the same trend being

reflective of armed forces personnel of the same age cohort. Furthermore, reports of

sentiment among youth in the United States concerning the use of torture do not identify

those who are armed forces personnel. As the Reed College report (2008), the

Huffington Post Poll (Swanson, 2012), and the Red Cross survey on public opinion

regarding torture indicate between 47% and 51% of young Americans believe that torture

is acceptable, it is important to explore what is generating this motivation and whether it

is influenced by religion. While there has been much confusion concerning the role of

religion in the carrying out of terrorist attacks, the failure of relevant studies to assess the

influence of religion is significant. None of the studies reviewed reported data correlating

opinions with religiosity on this matter. Consideration of the religious dimension in

decision making on the use of enhanced interrogation by this cohort is absent from the

research reviewed and represents an opportunity to address a gap in the

5 5 USC § 3328—Selective Service registration states that “(a) An individual—(1) who was born

after December 31, 1959, and is or was required to register under section 3 of the Military Selective Service

Act (50 App. U.S.C. 453); and (2) who is not so registered or knowingly and willfully did not so register

before the requirement terminated or became inapplicable to the individual, shall be ineligible for

appointment to a position in an Executive agency.”

literature. Through this study, I sought to add data to the existing body of knowledge on

this difficult and important problem specific to this cohort.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to explore religiosity in the context of how it may

influence individual support or opposition to the use of enhanced interrogation on

terrorists and members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

A quantitative correlational research design was used to collect results from 105

respondents using a self-designed survey instrument. Participants ranged in age from

1834, were male and female, and had current or former service in the U.S. Armed Forces.

A minimum of 82 respondents was deemed necessary for statistical significance to be

determined. This number was intended to be the minimum number necessary for the

results to be generalizable to all U.S. Armed Forces personnel between the ages of 18 and

34 (Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, 2014). The problem of

inconsistent inclusion of quantifiable information concerning religiosity were addressed

by gathering individual data through quantitative research regarding religiosity and a

person’s opinion on the use of enhanced interrogation techniques. A quantitative study

design was determined to be most appropriate when collecting numerical data to

determine whether a relationship exists between two or more variables (Cozby, 2007;

Trochim, 2000).

The intent of this research was to enhance scientific knowledge concerning the

dynamics of culturally and politically motivated behaviors, as well as the interaction

between them, in order to promote positive social change. This correlational study was

designed to determine whether a relationship exists between religiosity and support for

the use of enhanced interrogation on captured enemy soldiers or fighters, as well as

captured U.S. Armed Forces personnel. The independent variables of religiosity, age,

and gender with the dependent variables of support for or opposition to enhanced

interrogation techniques and religion were compared to determine whether a correlation

exists. Survey questionnaires composed of 10 Likert type questions were administered

via the Internet using a built in online survey application feature of the Survey Monkey

website, which was available for 30 days. The use of surveys to measure opinion is

reliable if the questions strictly adhere to the topic and allow for unambiguous answer

choices (Wikman, 2006). Internet based surveying was appropriate for this study, as this

method has been shown to yield higher response rates and lower response bias over other

forms of sampling (Sax, Gilmartin, Lee, & Hagedorn, 2003). A self-designed survey

instrument was used after a pilot study to ensure reliability and validity of the questions.

Although the survey was self-designed, the individual questions in the survey were taken

from three different validated instruments after obtaining permission from the owners.

The original questions came from the Public Religion Research Institute—Religion News

Survey (PRRI-RNS), the Duke University Religion Index (DUREL), and the American

Red Cross Survey on International Humanitarian Law (ARC-SIHL). Specific validated

questions were taken from these instruments in order to successfully qualify respondents’

responses on their perceptions and as a measure of religiosity on a question by question

basis within the unique context of the self-designed survey. The self-designed survey

was not meant to validate previous findings but determine new ones.

Past researchers have demonstrated that religion influences personal as well as

national decision making on domestic and foreign policy (Malka & Soto, 2011).

Religion has also historically been known as a paradoxical inspiration for peace and

justification for aggression. The discussion concerning how much influence religion has

on society begins with how it influences individuals. The information gained from this

study may be useful to individuals, researchers, and governments in understanding the

outcomes that result from the complex interplay between religion and support for

enhanced interrogation among those who are or have served in the U.S. Armed Forces.

Moreover, the issue is important because it involves the values of Homeland Security,

Domestic and International Law, the promotion of the image of the United States, and

global humanitarianism (Malka & Soto, 2011).

Nature of the Study

Advocates of enhanced interrogations have suggested that pain is a powerful tool

and is effective when used in determining the truth, as the guilty are forced to confess

their secrets (Gray & Wegner, 2010). Meanwhile, 63% of churchgoers are reportedly

more likely to pay closer attention to the opinions and views on the matter expressed by

their ministers, pastors, and other church leaders (Lipka, 2013). The study is a

quantitative correlational design, the goal of which was to determine a relationship

between religiosity and personal perceptions on enhanced interrogations among young

adults serving in the military. This design was chosen because it was appropriate to the

goal of determining whether there is a relationship between two or more specific

variables (Cozby, 2007). A correlational approach was considered appropriate for the

study, as it allowed the respondents to answer the survey questions within the context of

their natural state (Creswell, 2009). Furthermore, the study focused on individual

demographic characteristics and their relationship to opinions on the use of enhanced

interrogation on both enemy soldiers and U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers

or fighters. This perspective was explored by Gutierrez, DeCristofaro, and Wood in the

International Review of the Red Cross on “What Americans Think of International

Humanitarian Law” (2011). According to Creswell (2009), a qualitative research design

requires personal interviews with the participants as means of extracting data and requires

personal experiences to be used in the data analysis. Because the nature of the study was

to explore the relationship between two variables using numerical measurements and

analysis, not observational analysis, a qualitative research design was not used. After

the data are gathered from the survey responses, the analysis process ensued using a

descriptive statistical approach. Pearson’s correlation analysis, independent sample t-

testing, and regression analysis were used to validate whether a relationship existed

between the response variables from each question. Pearson’s correlation analysis was

used to measure data in this study of the variables that were continuous. An independent

sample t test was conducted to determine the relationship of the dichotomously measured

independent variables of gender and religion with the dependent variable of use of

enhanced interrogation on terrorists, suspected terrorists, and members of the U.S. Armed

Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters. The t test was conducted to determine

whether the dependent variable was continuous with the selected independent variables

with dichotomous responses. The self-designed survey instrument consisted of 10

questions using a Likert type response scale.

This data collected from this study adds to the existing body of knowledge and

provides insight into the complex interaction among religion, policy, and how they create

positive social change. All items asked of the respondents can be found on the

selfdesigned survey instrument (Appendix D). Questions were pilot tested following

Walden University Investigational Review Board (IRB) approval and prior to

administration of the full survey to the study sample of respondents (Appendix B).

Because it can be difficult to obtain answers to sensitive questions, a self-designed

instrument was created for precision, relevance, and brevity. Short, simple questions

usually result in higher completion rates. It was first deployed as a pilot study with the

limitations of no more than 10 participants and for a period not to exceed 15 days in order

to test the hypotheses and validity and reliability of the tool within a reasonable amount

of time. It was not necessary to amend the instrument based on feedback from the pilot

study. Specific questions used to elicit feedback were:

1. Are the questions clear and easy to understand?

2. Do the questions lead you to choose one answer over another?

3. Was there enough variety in the answer choices offered for you to easily

provide a response specific to you?

Research Questions and Hypotheses

The following research questions and hypotheses guided this study: RQ1:

Is religious affiliation associated with support for the use of enhanced

interrogation on terrorists and suspected terrorists?

H01: There is no statistically significant relationship between religiosity and

support for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected

terrorists.

Ha1: There is a statistically significant relationship between religiosity and

support for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected

terrorists.

RQ2: Is religiosity associated with support for the use of enhanced interrogation

on members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or

fighters?

H02: There is no statistically significant relationship between religiosity and

support for the use of enhanced interrogation on members of the U.S.

Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

Ha2: There is a statistically significant relationship between religiosity and

support for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on members of

the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

RQ3: Are demographic variables, particularly age and gender, associated with

support for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected

terrorists?

H03: There is no statistically significant relationship between age and support

for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected terrorists.

Ha3:

There is a statistically significant relationship between age and support for

the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected terrorists.

H04: There is no statistically significant relationship between gender and

support for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected

terrorists.

Ha4: There is a statistically significant relationship between gender and support

for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected terrorists.

RQ4: Are demographic variables, particularly age and gender, associated with

support for the use of enhanced interrogation on members of the U.S.

Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters?

H05: There is no statistically significant relationship between age and support

for the use of enhanced interrogation on members of the U.S. Armed

Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

Ha5:

There is a statistically significant relationship between age and support for

the use of enhanced interrogation on members of the U.S. Armed Forces

captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

H06: There is no statistically significant relationship between gender and

support for the use of enhanced interrogation on members of the U.S.

Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

Ha6: There is a statistically significant relationship between gender and support

for the use of enhanced interrogation on members of the U.S. Armed

Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

The null hypothesis of the correlation would be valid if there were no significant

relationship between support for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques and

religiosity. The results might support or oppose the importance of religion in the decision

to support the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorist subjects and members

of the U.S. Armed Forces.

Theoretical Framework

This study used motivational analysis as a theoretical framework built upon the

classic concepts and theories used to explain the fundamental motivations that influence

one person’s beliefs and how motivating factors vary from person to person, as well as

internal and external intervening influences. The major theoretical foundations of this

study included Milgram’s theory of doctrinal obedience, Maslow’s theories of

motivation, Erikson’s theories of social development, the doctrine of just war theory,

Kant’s universal law of nature, and Locke’s moral motivation theory, the foundations of

which are thoroughly examined in Chapter 2.

Obedience Doctrine and the Media

The mass media, which propagate the ideas and priorities of those who are in

direct control of information or have the capital to purchase the media, can use outlets to

motivate more people in more ways and in less time than has been the case over the

previous three millennia (Hanson, 2013). This ability has grown significantly as a

consequence of the growth of satellite television, cable television, and the Internet as

facilitated by the elimination of the Fairness Doctrine (1949) in 1987, which removed

restrictions on how broadcast media can be used.

As investigated by Milgram in the 1960s, the concept of doctrinal obedience as a

motivator let him to conclude that authority figures can influence individuals’ behaviors.

This authoritarian concept could be similarly characterized in the context of religious

orthodoxy in regard to individual decision making (e.g., the influence of the laws

contained in the Ten Commandments on individuals’ decisions). However, in the

original experiment, Milgram was attempting to determine whether it was justifiable for

soldiers in Germany during World War II to inflict torture on prisoners if they were

ordered to do so by an authority figure of significance in the culture, as was the argument

made during their trials. This was known as the Yale Experiment and was conducted

using a number of randomly selected participants who inflicted a graduated level of

increasingly painful electric shocks on a student as part of their role in the experiment.

Between 61% and 66% of those who applied the maximal lethal level of electrical shock

did so under the insistent verbal direction of an authority figure (researcher) with

complete obedience. When the subjects did question the efficacy of the electrical shock

on compliance, the researcher responded to the teacher (the subject’s defined role in the

experiment) by stating, “Please continue or please go on; the experiment requires that you

continue; it is absolutely essential that you continue; you have no other choice, you must

go on” (Milgram, 1963, p. 374). Through perceived authority, and as delegated from the

university to the researcher, many of the teachers in the experiment chose to follow the

direction of the institution, and as such placed the desires of the institution above their

own personal values as a just cause for the continued application of the shock therapy on

the students. The results of the experiment subjectively validated the response from the

German prison guards who were following the direction of the state propaganda stating

that “the Jews are guilty of everything” (Herf, 2006, p. 183). Therefore, motivation to

support enhanced interrogation or not must be independent of insistent governmental

demands for compliance without moral reasoning. As a result, consideration of the

individual’s motivations and moral justification for these motivations is indicated. This

is a very significant to this research, as a direct correlation can be made between the

students in the study and members of the U.S. Armed Forces with regard to following

lawful orders. Even in light of a sworn devotion to duty taken by all members of the U.S.

Armed Forces, violation of a lawful order (such as the prohibition on torture) has both

occurred and resulted in legal penalties. Numerous classic theories, such as those

developed by Piaget, Kohlberg, and Bronfenbrenner are used to explain the origins of

individual moral development and were explored for this study. These studies posit that

starting shortly after birth and progressing throughout childhood, the development of

what is right and wrong is nurtured, tested, and guided by adult parents, caretakers, and

ultimately society. Therefore, with all things being equal, an individual’s ability to

distinguish between right and wrong is assumed. However, it is the government’s

responsibility to ensure the integrity of institutional morality, including that enacted by

the U.S. Armed Forces and in turn through its personnel. Therefore, it is incumbent upon

the government, military leadership, and individual members of the U.S. Armed Forces,

religious or not, who have taken the Enlistment Oath or Oath of Office to recognize when

a violation of the law is taking place and report it to a higher authority.

The blurred lines between substantive guidance, entertainment, and news media

interpretations also affect a person’s motivation. For example, U.S. Brigadier General

Patrick Finnegan, who teaches several courses on the law of war at West Point, stated, “it

had become increasingly hard to convince some cadets that America had to respect the

rule of law and human rights, even when terrorists did not.” When asked why, he stated,

“one reason for the growing resistance was the misperception spread by ‘24,’ (TV series

2001-2010) which was exceptionally popular with his students (at the time).” He

explained, “The kids see it, and say, ‘if torture is wrong, what about 24?’ The disturbing

thing is that although torture may cause Jack Bauer (the protagonist in 24) some angst, it

is always the patriotic thing to do” (Mayer, 2007, p. 3). This point is further sustained by

the architect of the same military law program taught by General Finnegan: Gary Solis.

He observed that some students had adopted the same attitude as the lead character in 24,

in that “his students were particularly impressed by a scene in which Bauer barges into a

room where a stubborn suspect is being held, shoots him in one leg, and threatens to

shoot the other if he doesn’t talk.” He tried to convince the students otherwise: “I tried to

impress on them that this technique would open the wrong doors, but it was like trying to

stomp out an anthill” (Regan, 2007, p. 1).

Other examples have preceded 24, and many television and movie spin offs

continue with similar plot lines that justify the use of torture while simultaneously

promoting a wholesome, all-American hero. The death-before-dishonor image cannot be

ignored as a motivational influence shaping opinions on the use of torture. This is

especially apparent in light of the ambiguous religious nature of the character in 24 who

emulates the traditional American nationalist sentiment associated with the Protestant

faith while simultaneously taking solace in the comfort of an Islamic Imam by asking for

absolution of his sins from his deathbed in the final episode of the season. Entertainment

media, with their ability to take art from imitating life to representing how life is or

should be, constitute a powerful motivator and should be recognized as such. Continuing

with this example, consideration should also be given to the underlying history of the

main character’s prior military service, which is referenced periodically throughout the

series.

In general terms, terrorists also use obedience doctrine and the media to spread

threats or actual images (and the aftermath) of their activities to create fear, often linking

their actions to religion (Perl, 1997). They also use the media to generate support for

their cause by exposing actual or fictional weaknesses in their enemies’ defenses and by

portraying their comrades as martyrs when they are killed or captured. Furthermore,

contrary to what one would expect, the information gleaned from the intentional and

unintentional disclosure by the government and media, as well as through dramatic

representations by the entertainment industry concerning when torture is appropriate

provides further justification to terrorists who would spin it to support their cause (Beu &

Buckley, 2004). Consequently, the media can also be used to create a reactionary and

sympathetic response in people, which manifests itself in the form of overt anger, anxious

frustration, or even the motivation to seek vengeance within an individual or group far

removed from the immediate situation. The members of the viewing public, according to

the A. C. Nielsen Company, watch an average of 250 billion hours of television per year

or spend 20% of their day watching television, and they are keenly aware of terms such

as breaking-news and news alert (Herr, 2012, para. 2). For some, these news stories

create a surge of emotion in anticipation of what is likely bad news, especially if terms

commonly associated with terrorism are used. In the post-9/11 era, when being prepared

for the next attack is frequently emphasized, the media, as a moderator for reacting to the

news presented, do not offer a viable substitute for personally comprehending the events

of the day or facilitating how individuals should deal with them. There is a need for

social change with regard to bias control in the U.S. media. With the spread of

inexpensive cellular phone technology and Internet accessibility in the United States, the

variety of options for news and social media access is virtually unlimited. The same is

true for global consumers of media information, which is not realized or recognized in the

English language literature, and as such the accuracy of the information is relegated to

those who translate it into their native tongue who may not appreciate the context.

This may (or may not) be subject to the translator’s bias or governmental censorship. As

a result the media have a profound effect on the perceptions of religion and enhanced

interrogation by individuals who are exposed to it, including U.S. Armed Forces

personnel.

Maslow’s Theory of Motivation

In 1943, Maslow identified five levels of human needs arranged in a stair-step

progression demonstrating how humans are inherently motivated to ascend to higher

levels of functioning as lower needs are met. In his paper “A Theory of Human

Motivation,” the journey begins at the lowest step, progressing “up” in the hierarchy as

successive needs are met. This progression upward represents sequentially increasing

levels of complexity in cognitive functioning and decision making. They are arranged

from lowest motivational needs to higher levels, starting with physiological needs and

progressing to safety, love and belonging, esteem, and respect and concluding with

selfactualization as the pinnacle of human needs. This concept serves as the basic outline

for this project when translated to the influence of religion as a motivator that alters the

individual’s decision-making process. As stated by Maslow, there are “multiple classes

of motivation that determine behavior,” and this study focused on the influence of

religion as one of these classifications of motivation (Maslow, 1943, p. 370). While not a

requirement for survival, religion can be seen as an interest that serves as a means to an

end; “if we have a right to the objects of our vital human needs, then we also have a right

to at least some means that could enable us to satisfy our human needs” (Garrett, 2004, p.

1).

Erikson’s Theory of Social Development

Erikson’s theory of psychosocial development indicates that young adults (19-40

years) are resolving the task of generativity vs. stagnation. Because of this, they attempt

to make decisions that will help move society forward by creating positive social change

(Erikson, 1950). The cohort in this study is significant to social and behavioral scientists

because its members are attempting to resolve Erikson’s identified developmental

challenge by exercising their own independent ability to make a significant contribution

to society.

Just War Theory

The theory of a Just War is attributed to Saint Augustine as a doctrine to ensure

that going to war is the right thing to do and that the participant’s conduct in prosecuting

war is moral. Specifically related to the use of enhanced interrogation under this theory is

the application of Augustine’s criterion of Jus in Bello, or the law of conduct in waging

war. Specific features of this theory include the distinction between combatants and

noncombatants, the use of restraint and proportionality in the severity of action, an

emphasis on limiting collateral damage to civilian property while focusing efforts on

military targets, description of mistreatment of enemy combatants, and prohibition of the

use of uncontrollable or evil weapons (Guthrie & Quinlan, 2007). This theory is

significant to this study due to its impact on military justice, which the cohort studied is

obligated to abide by.

Kant’s Universal Law of Nature

The moral philosophy of Kant emphasizes the individual and how moral decisions

are made autonomously (Saurette, 2005). Furthermore, the social authority of reason and

the religious boundaries established by society were regarded by Kant as a measured

hope of combating “the evil of which human beings are capable,” requiring “the public

use of reason” in regard to respect for what constitutes an “ethical commonwealth” in the

way society respects its members (Rossi, 2005, p. 13). This requires what Kant

considered to be actions of the highest moral standard and principles in decision making

as moral imperatives to include not only knowing what is right and just, but also doing it

as if it were a universal law of nature (Guyer, 2007, p. 345). Therefore, the application of

the laws of nature as described by Kant should be reflected upon for moral decision

making and positive social policy on enhanced interrogations.

Locke’s Moral Motivation Theory

The philosophy of Locke concerning moral motivation resulted from his

consideration of the decision-making process weighted against the concepts of good and

evil. This philosophy includes consideration of the impact on human moral decision

making and law, in that “law is to no purpose without punishment,” and good resulting in

reward and evil resulting in punishment are practical applications of what he described as

obedience of divine moral rules (Goldie, 1997; Locke 1663–1664, p. 113). Therefore,

adherence to the law of nature, according to Locke, is a motivation to do well while

maintaining social good order and peace and being ever mindful of the concept of

reasonableness in its application as an obligation to follow the “Golden Rule” (Locke

1680, p. 278; Waldron, 2002, p. 101). While simultaneously supporting equal and fair

treatment, Locke insist that there is a need for sanctions against those who resist authority

and disobey the laws. His statement that “those who refuse to be led by reason in the

matter of moral and right conduct may be constrained by force and punishment” links the

liberal moral philosophy of equality with repercussions for antisocial behavior and divine

guidance, all of which have a role in moral decision making concerning the topic of this

study (Locke 1663-1664, p. 117; Waldron, 2002, p. 147).

Motivational Analysis

Problems associated with moral decision making and public opinion in policy

making concerning enhanced interrogation fit appropriately within the theoretical

framework of motivation. Public opinion on the use of enhanced interrogation was found

to meet the definition posed by the Greek philosopher Aristotle for equals to meet equally

(Gosepath, 2011). This implies the respondents agree that that it is acceptable to

interrogate captured U.S. Armed Forces personnel in the same manner in which U.S.

personnel interrogate detainees. This situation is in contrast to Aristotle’s moral question

of unequal treatment being met with unequal treatment (Gosepath, 2011), indicating that

the problem with interrogation policy is that is discriminatory in its application.

Therefore, using the same logic, policy that discriminates is neither fair nor just.

Human beings need rules and laws to guide those principles that will enable their

civilizations to be prosperous and just. Conversely, political policy that discounts actual

public opinion on the matter of social significance does not provide for the common

good. Maintaining social norms in order to protect the common good and live in

harmony with one another is essential. Establishment of norms and adherence to them

are necessary in order to preserve the function of any global society that must enforce

what is good and right while opposing what is not. Considering and applying these

theories to the development of positive social policy on the use of enhanced interrogation

by adhering to the concepts of liberty, equality, and justice is the desired course

(Nussbaum, 2001). Therefore, the actual opinions of the citizens should be considered by

expanding and addressing the ethical perspective on enhanced interrogation policy to

meet the criteria of the theoretical framework discussed here.

Definition of Terms

Definition of key terms used throughout this study is important in order to provide

a clear understanding of these terms within the context of this study. The goal is to avoid

ambiguity and prevent misinterpretation while adhering to standards set by the

professional community. What follows are accepted definitions of key terms used

throughout this study as taken from subject matter experts. It is important to present

these terms in a clear and concise manner with their accepted definition in order to

prevent confusion over their meaning as used in this study. Additionally, it is of

paramount importance to define religion, religiosity, and spirituality in the context of a

discussion on enhanced interrogation to demonstrate their interconnectedness. This

demonstrates how religious motivation can move an individual toward positive social

change when made clearer through concise definitions. By understanding the definition

that follows without identifying the associated term, “the infliction of severe pain or

suffering, intentionally inflicted, by a public official” can result in its having multiple

interpretations (UN Convention Against Torture, 1984, part I; article 1). In this example,

the interconnectedness has deep roots in religious scriptures and parallels the struggles of

those key figures in history who endured religious persecution at the hands of political

figures such as King Nebuchadnezzar, King Herod, and the Pharisees.

The definition for the term torture is taken directly from the first page of Article

1(1) of the United Nations General Assembly’s Convention Against Torture and Other

Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (10 December 1984, part 1,

article 1). This description, coincidentally, fits the reported treatment of Jesus as

accounted for in the Gospel of Matthew in the New Testament of the Holy Bible.

Although these religious corollaries might not be readily apparent to some, they are

intended to facilitate an understanding of its historical relevance and why an individual’s

attitude toward enhanced interrogation policy might lean toward or away from supporting

it.

Enhanced interrogation: For the purposes of this study, any interrogation

technique or approach, or any treatment related to interrogation, that is authorized by and

listed in Army Field Manual 2-22.3 and prior to release of Executive Order 13491

(January 22, 2009). This includes the following six techniques reported by the American

Broadcasting Company News (ABC News) as disclosed by an unnamed Central

Intelligence Agency source:

(1) The Attention Grab: The interrogator forcefully grabs the shirt front of the

prisoner and shakes him (2) Attention Slap: An open-handed slap aimed at

causing pain and triggering fear (3) The Belly Slap: A hard open-handed slap to

the stomach (4) Long Time Standing: Prisoners are forced to stand, handcuffed

and with their feet shackled to an eye bolt in the floor for more than 40 hours (5)

The Cold Cell: The prisoner is left to stand naked in a cell kept near 50 degrees

and is doused with cold water (6) Water Boarding: The prisoner is bound to an

inclined board, feet raised and head slightly below the feet. Cellophane is

wrapped over the prisoner's face and water is poured over him. (Ross & Esposito,

2005, p. 1)

Interrogation: “Logical idealization of the process of cooperative information

exchange which makes stiff demands on the witness” (Groenendijk, 1999, p. 110).

Religion: “(1) A system of symbols that acts to (2) establish powerful, pervasive, and

long-lasting moods and motivations in men and women by (3) formulating conceptions of

a general order of existence and (4) clothing these conceptions with such an aura of

factuality that (5) the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic” (Geertz & Banton,

1966, p. 90).

Religiosity: Religiosity is perceived as the degree of psychological and physical

commitment to one specific religion and is often measured through one’s frequency of

certain religious behaviors (Malka & Soto, 2011).

Spirituality: As individually stated, or any and all combinations of the following:

“relationship to God, spiritual being, higher power; not of the self; transcendence or

connectedness unrelated to belief in a higher being; existential; meaning and purpose in

life; life force of the person ” (Unruh, Versnel, & Kerr, 2002, p. 8).

Terrorism: “Terrorism is the commission of any act by means that are per se liable

to create a public danger with the intent to cause a substantial terrorizing impact upon the

population or a significant group thereof” (Ambos, 2011 p. 664).

Torture: As defined in Part 1: Article 1(1) of the United Nations General

Assembly’s Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading

Treatment or Punishment (10 December 1984):

For the purposes of this Convention, the term "torture" means any act by which

severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a

person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a

confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is

suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person,

or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or

suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence

of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not

include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful

sanctions (Meeting no. 93, 10 December 1984, A/RES/39/46).

Assumptions, Limitations, and Delimitations

Assumptions

The following assumptions were made in this quantitative correlational research:

(a) the participants were honest in answering the survey questionnaire, (b) the participants

were aware that the data would be anonymous aside from their demographics, and (c)

answers derived from the sample population could provide insight into individual

political reasoning that could be the foundation for future research. Restrictions

inherent to this study included its being limited to a target population of individuals who

were between the ages of 18 to 34 with current or past military service. This is of

significance due to their implied proxy enforcement role of U.S. policy. No other

demographic restrictions were considered. The survey questionnaire consisted of self-

developed questions adapted from three validated instruments on religion and enhanced

interrogations. Data for this study were collected not through random sampling, but

through convenience sampling that was preceded by a pilot study. The sampling

procedure used to select participants was applied through a purposefully designed

computer application via the Internet. The rapid increase in Internet usage over the past

several years presented the opportunity to have increased access to potential participants

through this medium (Nielsen-McKinsey Incite, 2012). Assumptions were necessary

within the context of this study due to the intrinsic nature of man to do good and seek

justice. With justice being the first virtue of social institutions, I optimistically assume

that man and society should be in accord with the natural order and that this would be

reflected in human works. Therefore, with all things being equal, human nature, religious

passion, and the social impact of the topic the data collected are considered to be true and

accurate reflections of the respondent’s opinion.

Scope

The study was bound by populations both younger and older than the target cohort

and excluded those without service in the U.S. Armed Forces. While the input of

everyone would be valuable, there was greater specific relevance for me in studying the

18-34 year old age group because they represent those in the U.S. Armed Forces who

would be most affected by policy matters on this issue.

Other theories and conceptual frameworks related to these areas of study that were

not investigated include moral and ethical relativism. This concept provides the

theoretical premise that religion (in this case) teaches one practice while society might be

otherwise inclined to argue against it due to conflicting root ideology. This can then lead

to moral disengagement and tolerance (e.g., stagnation). Also of interest is Luhmann’s

Theory of Autopoietic Social Systems. This concept of a social system indicates that,

through its functioning, the system recreates itself (autopoeitically) from within itself,

such that it tolerates enhanced interrogation techniques, inflicts torture, and is morally

founded, creating systems within itself that are ethical.

A goal of this research was for the data to reflect a dimension of human nature

that changes from generation to generation. This was identified as a missing component

in the research that should be considered as part of a larger social dynamic being

generalizable to all armed forces personnel.

Limitations

The demographic requirements of the study were a limitation. The instrument

was limited to individual participants who ranged in age from 18-34 years and had

current or prior military service. The medium used to disseminate the questionnaire was a

limitation. The instrument was distributed through the Survey Monkey application on the

Internet and was only available to individuals who had access to the Internet. Individuals

who were not on the Internet were not able to complete it. As a result, the study was

further limited to the participants who were made aware of the instrument on Survey

Monkey. As a consequence, participation was limited, and the study may not offer a

representative view of all 18-34 year olds with current or prior military service; however,

it may provide insight into the larger segment of the cohort. An additional limitation of

the study was its narrow focus. The study’s focus was determining a relationship

between religiosity and support for enhanced interrogation. The results provided

evidence in support of enhanced interrogation of terrorists and terrorist suspects but not

for enhanced interrogation of captured members of the United States armed forces not did

establish a link between support and religiosity, age, or gender. However, the study may

be expanded upon through future research that addresses these limitations. Lastly, the

use of a convenience sample was a necessary limitation due to logistical, financial, and

academic constraints.

Certain biases might have influenced the study outcomes if left unmitigated.

Design bias could have resulted if responses were in conflict with my own beliefs. The

questions chosen for the self-designed instrument were adapted from multiple valid and

tested preexisting survey instruments in an attempt to reduce this bias. There is also the

potential of a measurement bias influencing the study if subjects provided answers they

felt were or were not socially acceptable. To mitigate this, survey questions were taken

from preexisting instruments and were self-designed to include an additional ambivalent

answer choice option with the goal of allowing for full participation by reducing

participant stress. Conducting a pilot study was also an attempt to identify whether bias

controls built into the questions were effective. The last bias of significance to be

discussed is sampling bias. This might have influenced the research if the population had

been limited by unforeseen circumstances and could have resulted in over-representing or

under-representing individuals within the sample group and the ability to generalize the

results. This was addressed by using a popular and proven deployment platform for a

reasonable amount of time to collect the results. While the elimination of all bias in an

instrument would be ideal, it is also impossible to achieve. As a researcher, I have

attempted to minimize bias to the lowest level possible by identifying its existence and

reducing or preventing the misuse of the findings that resulted from this research.

Delimitations

Specific aspects of the research problem that encompass the scope of this study

include the historical foundations which the enhanced interrogation techniques at issue

today are based upon. This is important to include because of the lessons learned that

have helped to identify what has been done in the past. Good or bad, these historical

examples serve to define our individual (personal history) and society (social history) that

can impact the internal validity of the study. This specific focus was chosen due to the

ubiquitous nature of a guiding entity that is associated with development of moral

judgment. Having guidance from religion, spirituality is closely associated with moral

behavior. However, not having a religion does not necessarily mean that the individual

does not have a morally based approach to the development of an opinion on enhanced

interrogation. This is why a clear and concise definition of terms (torture, terrorist, etc.)

was necessary to ensure that the focus remained on the issue and did not stray into the

realm of the immeasurable. The study was delimited to focus on religiosity and the

influence it may have on individual opinions concerning enhanced interrogation.

This study was not intended to determine the applicability of enhanced

interrogation or any other variable. The Likert-type questions in the survey questionnaire

were adapted from three specific instruments—(a) the Public Religion Research Institute

Religion News Survey (PRRI–RNS), (b) the Duke University Religion Index (DUREL),

and (c) the American Red Cross Survey on International Humanitarian Law (ARC–

SIHL)—which have been shown to appropriately quantify the variable of religiosity and

respondents’ perceptions of enhanced interrogation. Other candidate questions and

instruments were excluded to preempt confusion, promote clarity, and maintain

relevance. Populations outside the 18-34 years of age cohort were not considered for

study due to the intent to relate the findings to the specific cohort represented and peer

advice. The collection of data via other means was considered and rejected in favor of

using the Internet platform selected.

Significance of the Study

The nature of the problem explored here demonstrates the difficulty involved in

attempting to standardize an approach to interrogation that is both productive and morally

acceptable. In the effort to improve business practice across multiple organizations, the

significance of religion must be taken into consideration to create positive social policy.

The goal of the literature review for this project was to research, review, and

assess the differing opinions and conclusions regarding the influence of religion on

enhanced interrogation policy through survey questioning. The topic of the study was

relevant to my interest and involvement in government, education, and interpretation of

ethical policy in an organization that serves a culturally diverse population with many

religious beliefs. Modern secular influences on popular opinions that are deeply rooted in

religious beliefs can simultaneously be influenced by popular political movements. The

objective is to create increased awareness of the effects that religion has on decision

making and the ethical dilemmas that may result. Through the application of

evidencebased knowledge and critical examination of the results, insight gleaned from

this study may provide a perspective on the social, popular, and religious factors that

influence enhanced interrogation policy. Lastly, the study produced substantial

information that may be useful for future in-depth research in the field on this unique

cohort.

The lines between the real and ideal in the shaping of an individual’s opinion

regarding a controversial religious or political idea will change based upon many

motivating factors. These may include the frequency at which information is delivered,

as well as the context in which it is presented, if it is intended to appeal to both the

religious and the secular. This information helps to motivate individuals to collectively

form opinions. Despite the motives and the influences that shape public opinion on

enhanced interrogation, U.S. citizens remain divided when it comes to treatment of

suspected terrorists (Malka & Soto, 2011). While some view enhanced interrogation as a

means of extracting information, others think of it more as a means of asserting power

and control (Carlsmith & Sood, 2009). In a December 14, 2014 interview concerning

enhanced interrogation techniques that, according to NBC Television host Chuck Todd

(interviewer) was what most of the rest of the world calls torture former Vice President

Dick Cheney (interviewee) stood firm on the distinction between the enhanced

interrogation and torture and offered justification for the use of the former, stating that the

techniques used were authorized by the President and deemed legal by the Justice

Department and could be used without being considered torture (Todd & Cheney, 2014).

Further support for the justification and distinction between enhanced interrogation and

torture came from President Barack Obama’s Director of the CIA, John Brennan, who

defended the use of enhanced interrogation as lawful and appropriate (Brander, 2014).

Public opinion on the matter offers support for the use of enhanced interrogation

techniques, as reported in a December 14, 2014 poll (n = 1001) in which 51% indicated

that the agency’s methods were justified and 56% indicated that they believed that

intelligence gained had prevented terror attacks (PEW, 2014).

The information derived from this study provides some insight as to religiosity

and its influence on the perceptions and opinions of individuals regarding their support

for the use of enhanced interrogation. The results should be considered in determining

whether further modifications to policy addressing the use of enhanced interrogation are

needed.

Individuals are unconsciously influenced by religious beliefs, which often justify

contrasting views on major social and political issues. This is also the case with spiritual

beliefs, as the terms religious and spiritual are often used synonymously (Malka & Soto,

2011). In the past, controversies surrounding the use of enhanced interrogation were

either opposed or supported by mainstream religious groups. This was often dependent

upon the level of conservatism or liberalism the individuals in that group possessed

(Malka & Soto, 2011). In addition to the results from this study, more data on the matter

collected over time may lead to other factors and determinations to be reached concerning

whether or not a relationship exists between religion and opinions on enhanced

interrogation. As a result, an increase or decrease in support for policy from these groups

can be inferred. This may effect positive social change through targeted leveraging of

constituent support for fulfillment of political promises into substantive changes to policy

in the future. The more frequently the relationship between enhanced interrogation and

religion is established, the greater the chance to embrace social change by “identifying

whose rights are being violated” and not merely using policy as an instrument of social

justice for the “privileged,” instead using it to seek equal justice for all (Gushee,

Zimmerman, Zimmerman, & Hickman, 2010, p. 150).

Despite the waxing and waning war on terrorism, there is renewed emphasis on

persistent religion-based violence around the world. Along with this is a growing

potential for the unabated use of enhanced interrogation, as the United States is viewed

by many as setting the standard on the matter. Information revealed though research on

enhanced interrogation and the religious dimensions will serve to guide future policy only

if it is thoughtfully considered and widely disseminated. This is an opportunity for U.S.

policy makers to set the standard by focusing their efforts toward understanding the

implications of religiosity and the legal use of enhanced interrogation when crafting

future domestic and foreign policy.

Summary

Chapter 1 has introduced the concept of religion and how it has functioned

throughout history as a cultural guide for human behavior related to values, feelings,

attitudes, and belief systems. Religion as a motivating influence on personal decision

making has been shown to be an underemphasized component of public policy research

and development. This lack of consideration is in direct contrast to its mass appeal

throughout history and ubiquitous presence in daily life. With growth in the “Nones”

(those without a religious affiliation) identified by Pew Research (2012), it is relevant and

necessary to determine to what extent religion will or will not guide the direction of

future policy for the Millennial (Generation Y) cohort with current or prior military

service. The purpose of this study was to explore religiosity in the context of how it may

influence individual support or opposition to the use of enhanced interrogation on

terrorists and members of the U.S. Armed Forces who are captured by enemy soldiers or

fighters. The study was a quantitative analysis of a series of responses to validated

questions on the use of enhanced interrogation with consideration of data on religiosity,

age, and gender as taken from a convenience sample of 18-34 year olds with current or

prior service in the U.S. Armed Forces.

Chapter 2 provides a review of foundational and current literature from multiple

sources on the interplay among individuals, religion, enhanced interrogation, and torture.

Numerous books, articles, journals, and multimedia reports were consulted to provide a

comprehensive presentation of the problem, competing sources of motivation, and

summary conclusions of the literature. The culmination of these finding is then

tangentially linked to the individual in terms of influences that affect the decision-making

process and how scientific appreciation of this is what drives the problem explored

through this research.

Chapter 2: A Review of the Professional and Academic Literature

Introduction

This research is a continuation of the review, analysis, and assessment of ideas on

religion, enhanced interrogation, and torture as found in numerous books, articles,

opinions, and media reports. In addition to these, numerous statements, declarations, and

conventions prohibiting the use of torture were examined, including examples from

throughout the recent history of mankind. Over the course of this review, there were

many corollaries that were also considered for inclusion due to the connection to and

influence they have on religion and policy development.

Conducted in an attempt to gauge public sentiment on the use of enhanced

interrogation techniques as a means of collecting intelligence, a longitudinal study by

Reed College (2001-2009) indicated that reports of public support for or in opposition to

enhanced interrogations failed to include “references to the actual state of public opinion

on this matter” (Gronke et al., 2010, p. 437). This resulted in a false-consensus effect

where the beliefs of the few were presented as representative of the majority public view

on enhanced interrogation. These concerns exemplify how an identified gap in

knowledge can undermine positive social change by influencing unaware policy makers

into assuming that the vast majority of the public support or oppose the use of enhanced

interrogation based on limited sampling or biased reporting.

This review also included topics from the fields of psychology, sociology,

philosophy, anthropology, and medicine. Over the course of this review, I researched

numerous legal rulings and interpretations of United Nations conventions and U.S. Code,

as well as a multitude of human rights groups’ position statements identifying various

violations of the same from around the world. Additionally, many ethical corollaries

concerning empathy, fairness, justice, and self-determination were examined. However,

it was difficult to find any substantive conclusions concerning these in the literature. One

example is the United Nations annex to the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel,

Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, submitted under article 19 of the

convention (addendum). This addendum, entered by the United States, introduced

numerous factors and considerations concerning sweeping exceptions from the

Convention against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment

or Punishment as originally published. Such practices as forced feedings and solitary

confinement have been challenged in court by the Center for Constitutional Rights (May

2012), which indicated that the “devastating psychological and physical effects of

prolonged solitary confinement … is torture” and demonstrated both the significance and

complexity of the issue (Center for Constitutional Rights, 2013, p. 1). The power of

investigation and enforcement on these matters is left up to the international community,

and the international community defers enforcement to its member states. By virtue of

this dilemma, an opportunity for positive social change is presented to the international

community.

As previously discussed, both former Vice President Dick Cheney and current

director of the CIA John Brennan have publicly defended the use of enhanced

interrogation while consistently stating that it is not torture and legal, based on a review

by the United States Department of Justice. This position is further recognized or

supported by historical documents such as those of the 1878 U.S. Supreme Court. The

court provided examples of what the drafters of the Eighth Amendment to the U.S.

Constitution meant by cruel and unusual punishment when upholding the case of

Wilkerson v. Utah. The court’s examples of cruel and unusual punishment identified at

that time were—(a) drawing and quartering, (b) public dissecting, (c) burning alive, and

(d) disemboweling. As late as the 18th century, these practices were accepted as the status

quo and not considered contrary to societal expectations of the time. Modifications to the

way punishment is applied have been adopted in response to changes in perceptions,

attitudes, and values in society. The changes may have been established because of a

greater appreciation for moral, ethical, and religious values. In deciding whether the

Eighth Amendment could be used to ban the death penalty by firing squad as cruel and

unusual punishment in a 1978 case, the court found that the capital punishment laws had

been revised in 1972 to include two phases—an innocent phase and sentencing phase—

and as such did not qualify as cruel and unusual punishment. This decision by the court

was the result of their agreement to apply the facts of the case to a four-step test. The

elements of this test that must be met are the following: The “essential predicate” is

(a) “that a punishment must not by its severity be degrading to human dignity,” especially

in cases of torture; (b) that a punishment must not be a severe punishment that is

obviously inflicted in wholly arbitrary fashion; (c) that a punishment must not be a severe

punishment that is clearly and totally rejected throughout society; and (d) that a

punishment must not be a severe punishment that is patently unnecessary and begs the

question of whether or not capital punishment actually deters serious crime, a question

that persists today (Furman v. Georgia, 1972).

The literature reviewed was examined and assessed by focusing on types of

motivation that influence a given individual’s decision-making process. This was

narrowed to how great an influence religion would be in the context of enhanced

interrogation literature concerning motivating factors that steered individual support

toward or away from the use of enhanced interrogation. The goal of the research was to

identify a potential link between internal and external influences about decision making

as it relates to enhanced interrogation. These collective links among social, political, and

ethical values as presented by religious leaders, philosophers, politicians, and the media

through various outlets were scrutinized. The significance of establishing this link

between religion and support for enhanced interrogation involves the impact a given

religious doctrine has on a significant public policy over other competing influences.

The strategy for this literature review was to first identify historical accounts of

religion and torture as the articles and publications indexed by both these terms were

used. The next step in the process was to establish a relationship among traditional

religion, spirituality, government, and individual action by identifying competing

influences that shape decision-making processes within these dimensions. The research

included a review of scholarly literature on religious doctrine, international conventions

against torture, and philosophical and human rights literature. In addition to this, policies

and procedure, social experiments, and public opinions from a variety of public policy

peer-reviewed journals and not-for-profit groups were examined. A conscious effort was

made to include the perspectives of both proponents and opponents of enhanced

interrogation as well as identification of strengths and weaknesses of the existing

literature.

When available, primary sources were reviewed in the context of secondary

presentations in relevant meta-analyses, book reviews, and direct quotes. Great effort

was expended in seeking out primary sources from original and secondary bibliographies

(the bibliographies listed in the secondary sources sometimes referenced new original

material). Themes that emerged as strongly influencing the direction of the literature

review were individual values and religious culture as it relates to motivation. Also,

definitions and examples of terrorism, torture, and enhanced interrogation techniques

were abundant in the literature and provided some context to the review (Ross &

Esposito, 2005). Lastly, the U.S government’s role and its relationship with relevant

geopolitical entities and human rights laws and conventions were also examined.

Potential issues that arose during the course of the review were identified as biases,

errors, or gaps in the literature related to religiosity and enhanced interrogation that may

provide fertile ground for future research. No single terrorist group, government, or

religion was intentionally singled out to represent any particular point of view. The bulk

of the literature reviewed focused on the interaction among religion, motivation, and

torture from a historical perspective. The literature and research were scrutinized to

ascertain how well they addressed the research questions regarding influential behaviors,

social change, policy making, religious standards, scientific support, and other policy

concerns. The review included perspectives from other social sciences and the public

policy sectors in order to gain insight into existing theories and current research. The

conclusions and methodologies reviewed in these studies validated the complexity and

relevancy of the religious influence and enhanced interrogation policy, which continues

to be of great academic interest and has undergone parallel growth as an area of concern

in all social and behavioral disciplines.

Growth of Religiosity Over the Last Decade

Over the past decade, there has been a sustained amount of growth in religious

membership across all denominations and faith groups that has been a direct function of

population growth, an enhanced global communications network, and increased interest

(Barrett, 2001). Contrary to this growth in religion is a segment of society addressed in

the U.S. Religious Landscape Survey on Religion and Public Life, which showed that in

the United States, 71% of those between the ages of 18 and 49 reported no religious

affiliation (Pew Forum, 2008; 2012). Additionally, some religious organizations and

governing bodies have been moving toward stricter adherence to their doctrinal roots and

away from the secularization of the mid- and late 20th century with the goal of retaining

their unique political and cultural identity (Orridge, 1981; Riesebrodt, 2000). The

rejection of secularization and western influences that are economic, cultural, and

political in nature appear not to be exclusive to a democracy because changes are

occurring across a broad spectrum of religious and political systems. For example, there

was a significant resurgence in regional culture and religion after the fall of communism

during the dissolution of the Soviet Union into 15 independent states. This resurgence

has been recognized as a growing global trend among former European colonies, along

with emerging Third World countries in Africa. Collectively, they are seeking to return

to or retain their traditional social and political identity while simultaneously moving

toward a more theocratic form of governance (Beeman, 2000). In the late 20th century,

growth in religious fundamentalism was spawned, and its origins have been associated

with the Iranian revolution of 1979. This new religious fundamentalism has been

characterized as embodying “both principles of absolute religious orthodoxy and

evangelical practice by calling for believers to extend action beyond religion into political

and social life” (Beeman, 2000, p. 1). Further evidence of this return to fundamentalism

can be found in the United States, as the number of Islamic places of worship has grown

by 74% since 2000 (Grossman, 2012). Incidental to this return to doctrinal roots is a

more noticeable shift away from western styles of clothing. Wearing business suits and

dresses has given way to the donning of traditional robes, gowns, and head covers that

had been worn for centuries in countries that, until recently, were subject to influences

from Europe and the United States through colonization and trade (Boulter, 2012). Other

religions have also grown closer to the teachings of their faith, as evidenced by the spread

of Christian evangelical values reaching deep into communities across the United States.

For example, in the 1980 United States presidential election, groups such as the Moral

Majority and Concerned Women for America spread their conservative political influence

among voters to try to influence the outcome. This was cultivated and sustained by

“mega communicators who built massive media empires” such as the 700 Club, which

had “a lot of political power,” making “it easier for the conservative political movement

to mobilize many people rapidly.” These forces were credited with influencing the

presidential election of Republican candidate Ronald Reagan in 1980 (Kintz &

Lesage, 1998, p. 43).

While the number of Muslims in the U.S. has risen, Islam as a religion is neither

the fastest in growth nor the largest in size (Pew Forum, 2011).

Figure 1. U.S. Census data on reported religious affiliation.

As the graph in Figure 1 shows, the largest growth in religious identification

among the people surveyed was actually among Catholics. However, due to growing

media exposure over the last decade on Islam along with the international attention given

to European legislation targeting public display of Islamic traditions it should come as no

surprise the perception is the growth and spread of Islam is outpacing all other religious

traditions which are not the reality. As a reaction to this perceived growth of religious

diversity, the governments of Belgium, France, and Switzerland passed laws to ban any

new construction of religious edifices and the wearing of certain religious symbols and

clothing in public (LOIS 2004-228, March 15, 2004 and 2010-524 September 14, 2010).

This illustrates how reactionary policy in Europe has been influenced as a result of

passive growth and infiltration of religion into the established culture of these countries.

The Changing Face of Religion

Religious growth has seen an increase in the number of individuals who

participate in one religion or another and not necessarily along traditional doctrinal lines.

During the years 1995-2000, the report World Population to 2300 (United Nations, 2004,

p. 8) indicated that 6.3 million immigrants entered the U.S. for the first time, bringing

with them their Cultural and religious preference. This was followed by the United States

Census Bureau survey findings that were released in March of 2005 which revealed a

five-fold increase in immigration of over 35 million people (over 10 years). The increase

resulted in a large shift in United States Census data from “protestant nodenomination” to

“Christian no-denomination” between 1990 and 2001. This cultural shift in religious

preference was also reflected in other lesser well known groups. These groups included:

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (LDS), The

Watchtower Bible and Tract Society (Jehovah’s Witnesses), the Baha’i Faith,

Christadelphian, Schism from Orthodoxy, Paulicianism, Swedenborgian, Theosophist,

and the Unitarian Church that demonstrated growth in popularity and membership

(Barrett, 2001). As a result, the collective perceptions of Americans are broadening

beyond Protestantism and Catholicism alone. In parallel with this was the global growth

of both the Sunni and Shia Islamic faith groups by nearly 22% over the same time period

where countries of the Middle East and Asia are or have begun refocusing on theocratic

rule of law (Barrett, 2001, p. 16). The governments are rejecting the adopted customs

and traditions of the societies who once claimed many of them as colonies by embracing

“traditionalism” and some overtly renouncing western religious and cultural influences

which includes: Iran, Mauritania, Pakistan and Afghanistan as Islamic republic under

Shi’a law along with 31 countries in Africa, two in the Americas, and 29 in Asia, and four

in Europe as examples (Sedgwick, 2004, pp. 21-38).

The traditional rule by Islamic law has a shared lineage that can be likened with

that of both Judaism and Christianity. The literature suggests that in opposition to these

traditional foundations of religious law there has been the emergence of newer religious

movements. The followers of these religions see their faith practices as equals to these

traditional religions in concept and practice and continue to grow in membership. This

includes everything from the obscure to the arcane which may have far different

teachings than those of the traditional religions (Kaufman, 1995). For the purposes of

this study, how these systems differ in tradition is not as important a question as is how

the belief in them and offered guidance to the individual is a motivating force towards

political action.

The resurgence of traditional religion over a short period of time changes the

cultural landscape of the world and is reflected in the United States. Additionally, the

ethnic diversity helps to reshape the religious majority and consequently strengthens the

ability of religion to influence public policy. Understanding this dynamic will increase

political insight into the power of cultural influence, religiosity, and the need for social

justice when contemplating enhanced interrogation policy.

Influences of Religion

There are five identified types of political religious experiences in the literature

that play a role in the development of a personal or political belief. These beliefs are

based on personal: (1) lingering or historical religious identity, (2) adopting a new

religion or religious belief, (3) using traditional religious affiliation in a nontraditional

way, (4) possessing and practicing a religion but showing preference for political motives

when in conflict with religion, and (5) religious beliefs guide every aspect of the person

and precludes the individual from political involvement (LaMothe, 2012). The five types

of religious experiences found in the literature are reflective of the many great schisms of

the past. Some examples include the councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon, the Great

Schism of the middle ages and the Reformation. As a result, Christianity has been

divided but to the disintegration or breakdown of negotiations and agreements related to

religious doctrine and this has not been limited to Christianity. Several other religions

have also been subject to this phenomenon. For example, Islam divided into two types

Sun’i and Shi’a while Judaism separated completely into Rabbinic Judaism and

Christianity. Religion remains a powerful political force, the impact of which is applied

to both the institution itself as well as effecting the secular establishment.

Understanding the Impact on Democracy

Individual citizens, politicians and military leaders have engaged in substantial

debates over whether “enhanced interrogation techniques” should be labeled as torture.

This debate was clearly articulated in the annex to the United Nations Convention on

Torture from the United States. Many citizens have a limited understanding of the

definition of enhanced interrogation and/or torture which can pose a challenge to elected

officials. Moreover, the definition has changed throughout the literature review which

could be a contributing factor to the general public’s misunderstanding and

misinformation. The literature substitutes the definition of enhanced interrogation for

torture most often when presented in the context of the treatment of prisoners or

detainees.

Although the U.S. and U.N. have laws against torture the literature sometimes

leaves the impression that torture and enhanced interrogation are indistinguishable

methods used to obtain desired information and as such should be treated the same under

the law. To appreciate the difference and how enhanced interrogation can be used to gain

a political end an understanding of a classification system may help put it within the

appropriate context.

The three models of political influence significant to this study are: National

Security Model, the Civic Discipline Model and the Judicial Model (Denton-Borhaug,

2008). The national security model is the framework that is predominately applied by

government and will be the focus pertinent to enhanced interrogation. The national

security model is purposefully used out of “a ‘political necessity’…because of a

perceived national emergency and/or because the national security bureaucracy

overwhelms those democratic systems put in place for restraint” (p. 218). The use of this

model was implemented in the Philippines (Spanish-American War, 1898) and more

recently in the Vietnam conflict from 1965 to 1972 during what was known as the

Phoenix Program, During the 7 years of the program, “methods of interrogation were

developed such as electro torture, water torture, stress positions, sleep deprivation, and

confinement in a freezing refrigerated room…” among others that were developed and

used in an effort to disrupt the infrastructure of the National Liberation Front (NLF) of

South Vietnam. (p. 218). The Phoenix Program was considered a relative success in

terms of disrupting the NLF and it now serves as a case study of how the national security

model is applied.

Reporting and Human Rights

Along with the move to a more cultural or theocratic governance by nations, there

has been a stern interpretation of the religion-based laws governing criminal punishment

and the treatment of prisoners often to the exclusion of human rights that accompanies

this change. This vigorous increase in the application of fundamentalism has been made

apparent through the media (news and entertainment) by sensationalizing the use of

amputation, stoning, hangings, and beheadings with the accompanying religious scripture

readings or repetitive chanting soundtrack (“Google Removes 640 Videos From YouTube

Promoting Terrorism,” 2012). This is not limited to social media or personal blogs,

YouTube, and Facebook, but also in the main stream new media such as FOX, ABC, and

MSNBC often times without any consideration of editing. Add to this the public opinion

poll results from the Huffington Post which revealed that 47% of

Americans felt that torture “…is always or sometimes justified” finding support for these

punishments seems almost effortless (Swanson, 2012, p. 1).

The admitted or self-reported use of enhanced interrogation techniques by the

U.S. has diminished in the media seemingly as a result of overt public and political focus

on the matter. In the 2009 book Getting Away with Torture, Christopher Pyle wrote

about the interrogation practices he discovered while serving as an Army Intelligence

Officer in the Bush-Cheney administration. More recently in the book The Obamians

(2012), author James Mann provides insight as to how the political bureaucracy that

remains constant from one administration to the next helped thwart the closure of the

detention facility at Guantanamo Bay while maintaining the status-quo for methods of

gathering intelligence from human sources. There is a long history in the free press of

post administration disclosure of what happened as seen through the eyes of the author

and is almost always critical of the political power in charge at the time. Although torture

is explicitly prohibited by law the methods and practices for gaining human intelligence

continues to be implemented and fruitful when carried out in accordance with Executive

Order 13491 (Mann, 2012).

The Bush Administration argued that the "unlawful combatants" were not subject

to the protection of the Geneva Conventions for treatment of prisoners of wars (POWs)

(Yoo, 2004, p. 135). The detainees were only subjected to interrogation tactics as

provided for in the Geneva Convention (Geneva Convention (III) Relative to the

Treatment of Prisoners of War, Aug. 12, 1949, 6 U.S.T. 3316, T.I.A.S. 3364 ["GPW"]).

The legal advisers of the Bush administration argued that the individuals were unlawful

because they are considered terrorists under the law of the United States as well as the

International law and asserted that they only conducted enhanced interrogation techniques

because they had information that posed an immediate national security risk (Yoo, 2004;

Brander, 2014).

Enhanced interrogation has been cited as being vital to national security while also

remaining objectionable to those who consider it torture. The origin of the word torture

as a noun can be traced back to 1540’s as a derivative of the middle-French word for

twist. The term Enhanced Interrogation has been used to describe the interrogation

process as being something other than torture despite being considered by some as a

euphemism for the same (Prasow, 2011). During the May 3rd, 2011 televised interview

with NBC news correspondent Brian Williams, the former CIA Director Leon Panetta

supports the use of enhanced interrogation, specifically “water boarding” as an

interrogation technique that led to Bin Laden’s location (NBC, 2011):

BRIAN WILLIAMS: 10:49:07:00 so finer point, one final time, enhanced

interrogation techniques, which has always been kind of a handy euphemism in these

post-9/11 years. That-

LEON PANETTA: 10:49:16:00 Right.

BRIAN WILLIAMS: 10:49:17:00 – in – includes water boarding?

LEON PANETTA: 10:49:20:00 that’s correct.

The summary differences between enhanced interrogation and torture (from the

definitions of Chapter 1) may be understood in this context as being at the level of

political and popular support for the action more than defining the action itself. This

distinction remains intensely debated and unclear. While the definition of what is

permissible in terms of interrogation practices is presented as the clear and legal position

of the United States, as taken directly from Executive Order 13491-Ensuring Lawful

Interrogations (January 22, 2009), there remains significant moral and ethical questions

as to its legality.

As a consequence, some believe the legal rights of Habeas Corpus and Due

Process have been eroded despite classified Department of Justice review and approval of

lethal Drone strikes that knowing killed 4 American Citizens outside the contiguous

borders of the U.S. (United States Department of Justice, 2013). The national and global

dangers of this are further exemplified in the current engagement between U.S. forces and

the Islamic State militant group known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant

(ISIL). The culmination of this is the international community’s perception of the U.S.

pursuit of airstrikes in Syria without concurrence from the United Nations or NATO by

facilitating limited participation of regional allies (Baron, 2013).

It is difficult for the public to argue in terms of literal results credited to the use of

Enhanced Interrogation. However, the road to those results has been fraught with

disagreement between who will take the credit and who will take the blame. This ranges

from a former interrogator who reported to congress the enhanced interrogation

techniques being used were “ineffective, slow, and unreliable…” to the repeated CIA

briefings to Congress between 2001 – 2007 that touted the successes of the program, it

continued unabated, unchallenged, and deemed legal by the U.S. Department of Justice

(Cooper, 2014; Judicial Watch, 2014). Additionally, with Congressional job approval

ratings hanging in the balance there are indications of a need for guidance to create

positive social change that is moral, ethical and considerate of religious matters

concerning Enhanced Interrogations. The potential benefit from change is apparent not

only in the research presented here in but in the persistent news reporting linking global

policy to religious doctrine of various faiths. Furthermore, in the case of this research,

the importance of religious convictions to members of the U.S. Armed Forces who

prosecute this national policy on a daily basis, through the discriminating eye of religious

doctrine they hold sacred, is vitally important in the success of this or any policy. The

subject’s responses to the questions in the survey underscore the need for significant

positive social change.

Enhanced interrogation is considered by some to be vital to national security while

also remaining objectionable to others; although, it is argued that, “if a democratic society

is going to torture, it should at least be done under the cover of law” (Lauritzen, 2010, p.

93). This statement implies persistent acceptability and defensibility under common law

with the support of the all branches of the U.S. Government (McCoy,

2007).

Moral Justification

The moral justification for enhanced interrogation has been sustained by its

supporters based on their interpretation of religious law while simultaneously being

condemned by human rights groups (Taiwo, 2008, p. 195). For the rest of the world,

prohibitions on the use of intimidation, torture, corporal, and capital punishment on

noncitizens have come as a result of media coverage of wartime atrocities, genocide, or

other crimes against humanity that are chiefly regulated by the United Nations through

local organizations and Nongovernmental Organizations (NGO). A relevant exceptional

fact is capital punishment in the U.S. and other countries. Capital punishment is still a

constituent part of the sentencing process in 32 states with 1,722 death sentences being

imposed by 58 other countries in 2012 (Amnesty International, 2013). While the most

treasonous threats to national security have resulted in the application of the death penalty

(e.g. Oklahoma City Bombing), use of the death penalty at the state level has not been the

result of a threat to state security. Additionally, capital punishment at both the federal

and state level is inextricably linked to the U.S. Constitution. So much so that any state

prohibition on capital punishment is self-imposed as a result of popular political support.

For example, in states where there is a large religious base that object to the use of capital

punishment on moral grounds, the state yields to this force for social change (Garland,

2012).

Despite this comparison by some between torture and the death penalty, there are

ongoing discussions among international organizations concerning the adoption of a

Universal Jurisdiction. This jurisdiction would allow the enforcement of law in

international cases of interest that involve citizens all concurring nation states beyond the

borders of their homeland. The challenges and rejection by the U.S. concerning this, if

support continues to grow, the world community could indeed establish common criteria

for administration of capital punishment in addition to defining prohibited acts of torture,

genocide, and the like (Graefrath, 1990; Addis, 2009). The concept of a Universal

Jurisdiction comes by way of some profound historical events. The intention of this

concept was founded in a culmination of the earliest record of human rights to include:

(1) the Cyrus Cylinder (539 BCE) which declared freedom of religion; (2) the Petition of

Rights (1628) which provided protection from false imprisonment; (3) the U.S.

Declaration of Independence and Bill of Right (1776, 1787, and 1791) which, among

other things, prohibited the establishment of a state religion; (4) the Declaration of the

Rights of Man and the Citizen (1789) which was subsequent to the French revolution and

guaranteed the natural-rights of man and (5) The Geneva Convention (1864) which

ensured the humane treatment of wounded prisoners of war (United for Human Rights,

2013). From these beginnings, and out of a desire to prevent future wars, the United

Nations was formed in 1945, and through it the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

(1948) established the baseline upon which human rights would be recognized around the

world (United for Human Rights, 2013).

Given this view of the concept of Universal Jurisdiction, one could conclude that

it would be the next best or logical step but the policy has not been adopted as of 2015. A

Universal Jurisdiction comes with some unique challenges of its own, which are

exemplified by the experiences of Belgium, who was first to exercise the concept in 1993

to which political forces in the U.S. immediately opposed and was subsequently repealed

in 2003 (Reydams, 2003). Consequently, it became necessary to repeal their current

version of the law and introduce a truncated version. While it continues to be supported

by many, the arguments against Universal Jurisdiction may cause some anxiety and

concern for others. The arguments came from critics like Benjamin Barber, Michael

Kirby, and Henry Kissinger who cited the potential for abuse by political leaders in

powerful positions warning that liberal interpretation by international judges made

legislation such as this reminiscent of the “inquisition and witch-hunting that occurred

during the Middle Ages” (Addis, 2009, p. 131). With limited participation due to

limitations on the freedoms that may be placed on U.S. citizens by the International

Criminal Court (including the military) universal jurisdiction exists as a theoretical

construct with limited applicability (Elsea, 2002). Finally, this and other sentinel

agreements and decisions are included in appendix (c) as a chronological list of United

Nation’s actions associated with human rights issues.

These conventions and agreements not only serve as examples of the challenge,

complexity, and breadth of the global issue but are also representative of the level of

international cooperation among the U.N. member nations in appreciating and addressing

the many facets of the problem. For example, the religious complexity involved in these

agreements can be seen in the response from the Organization of the Islamic Conference

in 1990 when it adopted the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam. The

conference was a direct response for the expressed failure of the U.N. to consider

traditional religious and cultural values that had previously been adopted in the United

Nation’s Declaration of Human Rights. Specifically, the right to freedom in religion as

specified in Islamic law (Tadjdini, 2012, p. 42). While different countries lobby to adopt

policy that supports their cause, the debate process and venue should provide for common

ground on the issues without unfairly singling out or sheltering member nations. By

reporting such things as compliance with international treaties and conventions, these

groups note that policies do not always reflect the spirit and intent of the agreement

adding yet another condition for concern:

Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other

measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction. No

exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war,

internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a

justification of torture such as an order from a superior officer or a public authority may

not be invoked as a justification of torture (United Nations Convention Against Torture,

1984, Part I: Art. 2).

While some in the literature claim violations of this remain unresolved or

selectively enforced, collectively they serve as a guide for future action which may be led

by the example set by U.S. in future policy. In 2011, the U.S. State Department reported

more that more than 12,500 deaths and 45,000 injuries occurred as a direct result of

torture or related to terrorism (U.S. State Department Country Reports on Terrorism

2011, 2012). This concern for public safety has led to ever increasing levels of physical

security at public venues as well increased demands on social infrastructure,

transportation, and entertainment resulting in higher costs and increased anxiety. Despite

the actions and allegations that were discovered during the “War on Terrorism,” some 30

years since ratification of the Convention Against Torture, many believe international

influence on this matter led by the U.S. has declined. This decline is considered the result

of the American people’s waning interests in international affairs while paradoxically

many domestic policy concerns mirror international ones (Pew, 2013).

Evidence of this influence can be found in the collective move away from

traditional conservatism towards secularism. The transition has been described as a

“generation shift in the USA, with a significant number of young evangelicals turning

away from partisan politics of the cold-war generation and showing greater interest in

social justice issues” (Vik, Stensvold, & Moe, 2013, p. 9). As a result, a global ripple

effect has ensued resulting in fewer new religious NGOs lobbying groups seeking entry

into the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (Vik et al., 2013).

However, numerous challenges emerge when considering policy enforcement or

changes in a country that was founded by congregational Protestants without a state

affiliated church based on the principals of tolerance and suspicion towards the

government who emphasize individual achievement as the path to salvation. With so

many influential religious groups inspiring their members to action in support of policy

that most closely meets their religious doctrine, appeasement for one group can come at

the expense of the others. While the use of physical and mental punishment is considered

on the surface to be repugnant and detestable, its universal abolishment by governments

around the world remains elusive, despite the efforts of the U.N. and the numerous

relatively positive outcomes that have resulted. On January 22, 2009 President Barack

Obama issued Executive Order 13491 to ensure lawful interrogations were carried out

from this date forward and were in compliance with U.S. Army Field Manual 2 22.3

(Obama, 2009). The presidential executive order was in response to highly publicized

abuses, such as those at the prison in Abu Ghraib and public concern over the methods

and practices at the detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba with the stated goal

being that of improving the effectiveness and lawfulness of the interrogations. The

administration has not cited any of the interrogations as being unlawful as they had been

reviewed by the U.S. Department of Justice and numerous Congressional briefs occurred

from between 2001-2007, which were attended by former Speaker of the House Nancy

Pelosi (Judicial Watch, 2014, p. 1). Although they were not considered unlawful, their

usefulness was in doubt, as was expressed by the CIA in the December 2014 Senate

report. However, other positive outcome qualifiers of this sustained policy include data

posted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The FBI posted information

claiming there were 78 major terrorism preventions, disruptions, and on-going

investigations to their highlights Internet webpage documenting their successful

mitigation was the direct result of information yielded during lawful interrogations (“Ten

Years After: The FBI since 9/11,” n.d.). Therefore, in light of these recorded successes,

the use of enhanced interrogation on suspected terrorists remains a politically justifiable

option for use by both secular governments and those who are religion-based, when

carried out within the boundaries of their law.

Despite the historical flaws in information transfer between the FBI, CIA, and all

three branches of government there appears to be potential support for the use of

enhanced interrogation across governmental agencies. However, as of now there remains

a deficit in the literature about the role religion plays on an individual decision making

process related to enhanced interrogation. Over the years, the U.S. public has received

greater exposure to increasing interagency ambiguity concerning government support,

religious support, and even their personal support for the use of enhanced interrogations

which remains strong and continues to grow (Miller, Gronke, & Rejali, 2014; Zegart,

2014). A policy relevant question is that of the reliability in the information the general

public receives. This concept, which is absolutely pertinent to this study, seeks to

determine the presence of religion as an influence for positive social change and marks a

challenge for the public in light of contradictory information and the discounting of

public opinion on the matter. A manifestation of this was identified by Joe Kernan and

John Harwood on December 17, 2014 when discussing how a New York Times article on

America and the Torture Debate failed to recognize 51% of the public supports the use of

enhanced interrogation and 28 % opposed it, but instead focused on Congressional

condemnation of the interrogators for using it (Kernan & Harwood, 2014). While the

political focus on enhanced interrogation policy can shift from administration to

administration the intent of this study is to give relevance to the individual dimension and

the moral influences that may affect their motivation. This phenomenon within this

context may translate over to other issues of significance to the politician and political

process.

Growing acceptance of enhanced interrogation has been influenced by a steady

stream of terrorist attacks in places such as Bali in 2002, Madrid in 2004, London in

2005, the U.S. embassy in Libya in 2012, and the Boston Marathon of 2013 (Josiger,

2009; Waxman, 2011). These attacks all serve as not only reminders of the global threat,

but also of the need to prepare for future attacks through intelligence gathering activities

while simultaneously ensuring the U.S. government and military preserve the values of

justice and liberty.

At the root of this confusion over the use of enhanced interrogation are the

arguments made by political pundits and the media. At the height of popular discussion

concerning the closing and relocation of prisoners held in the military prison at

Guantanamo Bay, Cuba it was revealed that “interrogation techniques intended only (for

prisoners at) Guantanamo Bay came to be used in Afghanistan and Iraq” over the past 10

years (Department of Defense, 2004, p. 68). This was the case during the 2008 elections

when it was promised that there would be an end to the “abuse and torture” that was

ubiquitously reported in the media to have been occurring at the military prison in

Guantanamo, Cuba. These reports were in contrast to what the candidate from the

opposing political party, led by the highly decorated former military officer and

presidential candidate Senator John McCain found. His assessment of the situation was

contrary to the reported finding on the use of torture at Guantanamo Bay, Afghanistan

and Iraq and was based on his actual experiences with torture as a prisoner of war for

nearly six years during the Vietnam War (Dobbs, 2008). While Senator McCain supports

the lawful use of interrogation methods by the CIA he opposes any methods not outlined

in the military manuals for conducting enhanced interrogations, specifically

waterboarding. Meanwhile, public support for the use of enhanced interrogation

measured in 2014 remains remarkably close to the level of support recorded in 2009

(Resurgent Republic, 2014).

The problem of obtaining an accurate assessment of political terrorism has been a

challenge and remains a gray area due to data coding and source material. In a review of

5,904 articles from the years 1976-2010 using the Political Terror Scale (PTS) along with

averages of all available scores from Amnesty International and U.S. State Department

reports, there were 81,866 individuals identified from 40 countries that had experienced

torture. This was confirmed after medical examinations and evidence of “higher rates of

reported prevalence of post traumatic shock disorder and depression” as a result of

exposure to torture and other traumatic events (Steel, Chey, Silove, Marnane, Bryant, &

Ommeren, 2009, p. 537).The results of this analysis may be used to predict the negative

outcomes of support for enhanced interrogations. The congressional report released in

December 2014 confirmed that the measures instituted during the interrogations were

ineffective at getting compliance or information from detainees (Meissner, 2014).

Scientific evidence suggests there are always consequences that result from

actions or inactions when faced with a dilemma. In the case of enhanced interrogation,

there are consequences not only for the individual that receives the mistreatment, but also

for the person(s) administering, ordering, and sanctioning enhanced interrogation. These

consequences can come in the form of any number of physical, mental, and behavioral

aliments, and affect as all parties involved, despite how well trained or well-conditioned

the individuals might appear to others. In a post-conflict systematic review and

metaanalysis on the effects of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) after a serious

event such as being terrorized by an attack or sharing the incident vicariously through the

media, a team of scientists confirmed through the research that “exposure to torture and

other potentially traumatic events account for higher rates of reported prevalence of

posttraumatic stress disorder and depression” (Steel et al., 2009, p. 537). These results

are marked by the fact that the physical and mental manifestations of symptoms are

predominant in countries where “torture is endemic” and “conflict is pervasive” (Steel et

al., 2009, p. 547). Therefore, the analysis shows that enhanced interrogation may likely

result in an individual’s having symptoms of PTSD. While the later examples of torture

are discussed, the most commonly reported response to a traumatic event according to the

Institute of Medicine study is PTSD. This is relevant to the target population of this

study because an estimated 2.6 million U.S. service members who fought in Iraq or

Afghanistan since 2001 may have undiagnosed PTSD. In order to help identify this

potential medical diagnosis, each and every service member should be evaluated by a

qualified licensed medical provider (National Academy of Sciences: Institute of

Medicine, 2012).

Spirituality and the Social Sciences

The resurgence of religion over the last decade has led to a greater awareness of

the influence of religiosity on various social and political topics. For example, with an

average four out of five Americans claiming some form of “religious identity” in the

2008 American Religious Identification Survey (ARIS) (Kosmin & Keysar, 2009). They

also indicated membership in one of the 270 large religious groups or, as in the case of

Christian groups which included, “the over 34,000 unaffiliated congregations” (World

Christian Encyclopedia, 2001). Religion remains a significant force that guides these

individuals; as such, these should be accounted for in the research. Professor John

D’Arcy May of the Irish school of Ecumenics, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland discussed

the role of the state and politics as influenced by religion by arguing that the impact of

religion on politics has increased over the past 40 years; more succinctly put, the

tolerance and acceptance of it. In the modern world, Professor May suggests that religion

is “fundamental to modernity” (p. 9) and will play a greater role in governance of the

“coming global civil society” (p. 11), therefore bolstering the argument of a growing link

between religious beliefs and political decision making on a multinational level. As a

challenge to this premise, Professor May acknowledged the tension existing between

political groups from within a similar culture as a source of conflict. Examples of this

tension arose after the division of India by British forces in the 1940s. The division of

India along religious lines was a consequence of British reluctance to oppose the Indian

Independence movement and subsequent to riots in the city of Calcutta between Muslims

and Hindus, opting instead to succumb to political pressure and divide the country along

religious lines. The goal of preventing civil war was not achieved. This resulted in the

deaths of hundreds of thousands and a partitioning of the country that caused a shift of

refugees between the regions and perpetuated the conflict between Hindus, Sikhs, and

Muslims albeit now somewhat contained by borders (Kumar, 1997). Furthermore, within

the Islamic faith there are political differences between the Shia and Sunni branches as

well as within the Christian faith around the world. Although this discussion is of a

global nature, it is relevant and applicable to the situation within the U.S. due to the

diversity and freedom to express both religious and political beliefs. As such, creating a

similar type of tension on a relatively smaller scale, as a microcosm that exemplifies how

this tolerance can influence popular decision making. An example of this is the changing

religious and associated denominational boundaries that had defined partisan politics in

the past. With the growth of secularism in the Democratic Party and religion in the

Republican Party over the past several decades there remains a challenge to strike a

balance between secular and religious influences in Congress (Dionne & Green, 2008).

The paradigm has recently been challenged within the Republican Party by the Tea Party

movement. Growth of the Tea Party resulted in the mobilization of likeminded

individuals focused on government reform and conservative values with the stated

mission, “…to bring awareness to any issue which challenges the security, sovereignty or

domestic tranquility of our beloved nation, The United States of America” (Tea Party,

2015). Formed in response to the expansion of government during the Bush

Administration and (the TARP Bank Bailout) and the Obama Administration (the 2009

Stimulus Bill and 2010 Health Care Bill) touting a return to Constitutional and American

values (Somin, 2011).

The tea party movement exemplifies how positive social change can arise through

grassroots actions when it is focused on party politics while moving away from secular

and religious values. A 2010 study by the Social Science Research Council focused on

the need for social change as a result of this grass roots phenomenon. Their findings

indicated a need to study religiosity and its influence on political decision making as a

topic of focus in the social sciences, a focus of which has doubled in volume over the past

20 years. Conversely, its influence as discussed in political science journals only grew by

little more than three and a half percent indicating the need for more published research

on this subject (Kettell, 2013; Jaschik, 2010).

Religious Shaping of Secular Trends

Essential to the project is the linking of grounded scientific research based on

demographic data which is reflective of the increasing influences religion has on one’s

political views and opinions. Religious influence continues to shape popular support for

public policy although the relationship is not well understood.

The conflict between one’s sexuality and one’s belief systems, a subject with an

extensive political and religious history that remains controversial, is an example of how

this shaping and reshaping of public support occurs. Modern secular influences on

popular opinion related to various topics such as this and the issue of torture can be

deeply rooted in religious beliefs, but can also simultaneously be influenced by the

popular political movements of the period (Spalek & Imtoual, 2008). For example, recent

homosexual political activism with the intention of gaining the same rights under Federal

law and State law regarding the recognition of marriage in the U.S. now has the implied

support of Pope Francis, who indicated “…gay people should not be marginalized” (Baig,

2013, p. 93). As the data presented indicate, “(certain) aspects of religion are still

influential” in secular decision making (Baig, 2013, p. 95). The existing research

provides insight into what is needed for the development of a comprehensive study. In

addition, verification of the data needs to occur in order to ensure the highest level of

quality and corresponding validity within the research. Such considerations to be used

include those that reach beyond their religiosity and include socioeconomic status, age,

and gender, concluding that “new themes … emerge or old themes to be (are)

rediscovered, while quantitative data can test emerging hypotheses” (Baig, 2013, p. 104).

Political Influences of “Nones” and Nontraditional Beliefs

Family, education, the media, religion and even the intrinsic forces of government

can shape the way one perceives and reacts to political problems. These sociocultural

aspects of influence have been changing with regards to religious influences as shown in

the PEW Forum report ‘Nones’ on the rise as a growing number of individuals report no

affiliation or disenchantment with traditional religions (PEW, 2012). Compared to this, a

growth in Spirituality and the seemingly purposeful avoidance of even the term ‘religion’

in order to not be categorized alongside a traditional belief system is growing as well

(Janis, 2011; Elliott, 2009). The result of this disenchantment with traditional Religion

has resulted in “distrust and disenchantment with institutions” along with an “awareness

of commonalities in the different human cultures, expressed in terms like ‘global

consciousness’” in some communities by embracing Spirituality or belief in an abstract

wonder (Spalek & Imtoual, 2008, p. 163, 164.).

This growth in spirituality is reflective of a growing collective consciousness that

seems to be factored into the political decisions involving religious beliefs to justify

actions of the state. How can one religion’s practice be permissible to one religious

group, while seemingly not to another? How can it be justifiable only under certain

specific circumstances? It is hypothesized that those who are not religious would be

more inclined to make decisions based upon a collective opinion or horizontal

collectivism regarding what is right and what is wrong but they might just all share some

fundamental stimulus response attitudes without being aware of it in regard to

nationalist/patriotic behavior. A meta- group conformity studies originally conducted by

Solomon Asch of Swarthmore College showed that the majority of ‘in-group’ members

had a greater effect on individual conformity with in the group as opposed to those who

were outside of the ‘in-group’. As a result, members of organized religions (or the U.S.

Armed Forces) show higher rates of conformity when surrounded by like-minded

individuals, which may or may not correspond with their actual judgment on the matter in

question (Hadaway, 2011; Bond & Smith, 1996; Asch, 1951). This dynamic as it relates

to psychosocial dimensions of group influence brings into view a psychosocial dimension

of group influence, whereby the subscribers to a belief system outside “traditional” can

demonstrate how their political opinions on issues related to torture are founded on such

principals as spirituality instead of religiosity relevant to this study

Types of Torture and Their Relationship to Enhanced Interrogation

In order to preserve the integrity of this project, great care has been taken by the

researcher to distinguish between torture and enhanced interrogation. In contrast, for

those whom have not studied the differences between the two, a challenging situation will

linger when discussing or debating what is and is not torture, personal choice, and the

law. The following examples emphasize the difficulties involved in independently

discriminating between the two. A student paper submitted to the Harvard University

Kennedy of Government in 2010 presented evidence of a shift in how The New York

Times and the Los Angeles Times reported ‘waterboarding’ in terms of torture since the

1930s. The report indicated the direct association of waterboarding with torture from

81.5% to 96.3% of the time from 1930 to 2004 ((Desai, Pineda, Runquist, Fusunyan,

2010, p. 7). However, this shifted from 1.4% to 4.8% from between 2002 to 2008 (Desai

et al., 2010, p. 8). Moreover, when waterboarding was associated with a country other

than the U.S. it was called torture 85.5% to 91.3% of the time (Desai et al., 2010, p. 11).

The information below intends to scientifically clarify the differences between torture and

enhanced interrogation for the purpose of this study.

The most well-known types of torture include: judicial or evidential, punitive,

interrogational, dehumanizing, terroristic/deterrent, and sadistic (Wisnewski & Emerick,

2008, p. 7). In addition to types there are also specific torture models which are:

economic, phenomenological, dramaturgical, and communicative. The economic model

of torture is one where the application of torture is used to extract information by

overcoming resistance to provide the information. In the phenomenological model of

torture, the torture systematically interferes or disrupts the normal flow and interactions

an individual has within the context of their own world. The dramaturgical model is

representative of the industry or business of torture and the roles individuals play within

the process as part of its application. As a result of modern society and the

preponderance of specialized media coverage that favors the extreme, unique, and

controversial, the most commonly discussed rationale given is that it is necessary to

prevent future terrorist attacks. Since the 1980s, society has been inundated with live

continuous television media coverage from satellite capabilities that favors the extreme,

unique and controversial broadcasts. This is a foundational component of what is

referred to as the economic model because of the economy scale is used to justify its

application. Lastly, the communicative model is used to represent the direct interactions

between the tortured and the torturer, as well as what is communicated, expected, and

ultimately delivered (Wisnewski & Emerick, 2008). Succinctly put, the needs of the

many justify the suffering of the few and the torture models put this in context. The

justification for this philosophy can find its roots in the modern interpretation and

application of the Just War theory and Jeremy Behtham’s Principal of Utility. This

theory attempts to present the argument as to how best to apply force that will result in

lasting peace while minimizing human suffering and promoting happiness (Perry,

Bratman, & Fischer, 2007; Oredn, B., 2008). The result has been a moving away from

the philosophical grounds of adherence to the categorical imperative to a more utilitarian

stance where the selective or economical use would serve as a justifiable means to an end

(Ellington & Ellington, 1993; Allhoff, 2005).

The literature supports the historical use of communication mediums to provoke

emotions, sway beliefs, and move the public to action on the question of using enhanced

interrogation or torture on suspected terrorists. In contrast, the medical research into the

mind and body’s ability to comply with the motives of enhanced interrogation (e.g. elicit

information to prevent terrorism or facilitate justice) has suggested the sensitive chemical

make-up of the human mind to fail the subject in such endeavors.

Obedience Doctrine and the Media

Aside from opinion and guidance from religious leaders individuals also rely on

different sources of credible information such as media. People focus on the news

presented by media outlets as the ‘authority’ on different important topic, to include facts

surrounding the occurrence and perceptions on the usage of enhanced interrogation

(Snow, 2007, p. 6). Sometimes, it provides differing information that subconsciously

influences the audience’s belief on whether or not enhanced interrogation must be

implemented in interrogation (Sturken, 2011, p. 1). It also has embedded itself into the

American culture certain perceptions of enhanced interrogation and their unique response

on the decision to exercise it (Sturken, 2011, p. 2). Reports have documented that

although enhanced interrogation is prohibited because it violates human rights, it is still

essentially used in times of war and when it is justified to serve a noble cause, such as

extracting vital information for the protection of the country’s people (Graber & Holyk,

2009, p. 221). Graber & Holyk researched media reports that covered torture stories from

the period of April 2006 until October 2006. Reporting coverage has been said to vary

widely as time and moments change as well as the amount of breaking news available for

broadcasting or reporting (Graber & Holyk, 2009). Additionally, media is also subject to

filtering of information and omission of negative comments on the use of enhanced

interrogation and the inability to divulge the complete story to its spectators (Graber &

Holyk, 2009). This content editing can influence the opinions of the viewers on the use

of enhanced interrogation techniques. Ultimately, it is vital to understand that the law

strictly follows the importance of morality and carefully treads by the imposed human

rights, in order to instill protection on the human rights of the public (Wendel, 2009, p.

59). Some lawyers have used an objective view on the use of enhanced interrogation,

stating that it is important to exercise it, in spite of its violations on the convictions of

morality (Wendel 2009, p. 60). Although not completely assessed in this research study,

the ubiquitous nature of the television media has an ability to spread information rapidly

which has not been ignored over the past 30 years. Future inquiry should be considered

especially since the potential news gathering techniques of the digital age are changing

some of the television broadcast networks agenda just as radio and newsprint did in the

past. Laws are not timeless or infinite in their scope and therefore should change when

circumstances mandate. Since the political system in the US has the tacit support of most

people, TV entertainment which makes the US government and specifically its state

agents look good are more likely to be profitable. The media produces what it thinks

people want to see.

Targeted Drone Strikes as Psychological Torture

In conjunction with the efforts of the Obama administration towards removal of

U.S. forces from direct combat operations in the war on terrorism, there has been a

reflexive increase in the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVS), also known as drones

which are remotely piloted aircraft. This relatively new military machine used in the war

on terrorism by the United States have basically two purposes which are reconnaissance

and the application of precise munitions in order to kill suspected terrorists or disrupt

suspected terrorist activity. In contrast to other historical military planning and strategy

measures utilization of these remotely controlled devices represent a move away from the

past mission imperatives with the goal of capturing and interrogating terror suspects. The

former Deputy Assistant U.S. Attorney General John Yoo, a staunch support of enhanced

interrogation for the President George Bush administration, suggested the use of drones

by the Obama administration “violates personal liberty far more than the waterboarding

of three Al Qaeda leaders ever did” indicating the loss of opportunity to lawfully obtain

information that would mitigate future terrorist attacks (Yoo, 2013). Hence, this

highlights legal concerns surrounding the use of targeted drone strikes with respect to

collateral damage and death. In the United States, a confirmed death of a citizen results

in the loss of due process under the law whether or not the victim is a suspected of

terrorism or associates with them.

In a U.S. Department of Justice White paper obtained by the National

Broadcasting Company (NBC) news, the authority given to the executive branch of the

government to undertake air strikes (using drones) is done only after the terrorists are

determined to represent a serious threat against the U.S. and can be taken against

terrorists who are citizens and noncitizens outside the U.S. without trial (United States

Department of Justice, White Paper, February 4, 2013). According to the DOJ White

Paper, the use of drones is in compliance with the laws of war, used only against an

imminent threat, and where capture is not feasible. While precise data are not given by

the White House or the Intelligence community, the numbers of those killed by drones

has been reported by Senator Lindsey Graham to be as high as 4,700 at the beginning of

2013 when the DOJ White Paper was released (Zenko, 2013). Freiberger’s Just War

Theory and the Ethics of Drone Warfare indicated the use of drones has creates

“unnecessary suffering” and a sense of dread that can be likened to psychological torture

(Freiberger, 2013). The claims of mass trauma is also reported in a recent study that

indicated nonterrorist mourners and families are fearful to gather to attend funerals in

large numbers because “…funeral have been struck by drones,” which has been likened

by those critical of U.S. drone policy liken to the State sponsored terrorism they are

trying to defend against (Drones, 2012, p. 92). Employment of drone aircraft has become

the standard in the war on terrorism as the Obama administration determined their use

outweighs the political cost of detention and utility of any intelligence gained through

interrogation (Boyle, 2013).

Analysis

The literature reviewed over the course of this project revealed conflicting

evidence on the strength and value of religion as a consideration in the formation of

policy concerning the use of enhanced interrogation techniques. The examples studied

during this review ranged from anecdotal evidence of tacit support to government

approved guidelines and prohibition on the use of legal Enhanced Interrogation

techniques. The theoretical framework was examined through practical research and

analysis that demonstrated the interplay of numerous philosophical perspectives on

justice, value, self, and morality. This, in addition to the nuances of the translated and

interpreted meanings of religious texts, when coupled with the predictability of human

nature provided insight as to the complexity of the problem with enhanced interrogation

and the influence religion can have when addressing it. Each of the themes presented

here serves to explain both the interaction between the theory and observations as well as

various interpretations of the problem.

Summary

Chapter 2 provided an extensive discussion on topics related to religion and its

influence on the use of torture compared to enhanced interrogation. The subject of

religion was discussed to convey its core foundation with regard to morality and

perceptions of the use of enhanced interrogation. Enhanced interrogation was thoroughly

reviewed to provide important facts on its use in times of war. The aim of discussing

torture, in detail, was to show its historical significance related to extracting valuable

information that could prevent future attacks or conflicts in involving the U.S. The major

theoretical foundations of this study include Maslow’s theories of motivation, Erikson’s

theories of social development, the doctrine of Just War theory (a soldier and serve God

and country honorably), Kant’s universal law of nature and Locke’s moral motivation

theory.

Milgram’s theory of doctrinal obedience, places emphasis on conforming to social

norms at all costs which can negatively influence the application of individual moral

decision making. This concept originates from Milgram’s research into obedience to

authority that arose during the 1961 Trials of German Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann.

The major hypothesis revolved around the question of culpability that might exist as a

result of blind obedience to orders without consideration of the moral implications.

Similar research has been conducted by Philip Zimbardo at Stanford

University (1971) on behalf of the military while researching the causes of conflict

between military guards and detainees. The rationale for this choice of theory is based on

its corollaries to military service and the performance of military duties under duress.

Maslow’s theories of motivation postulates that as human needs along the

continuum are met, achievement of higher levels of functioning and social engagement

become intrinsic motivations. This theory was developed as an attempt to explain how

some individual could achieve greatness while others did not. He found that as

individual’s needs were met, they were motivated to move to higher levels of functioning.

The rationale for choosing this theory is due to its translatability to enhanced

interrogation. Moving up the continuum, or pyramid, as needs are met is influenced by

circumstances which makes it possible to influence either a citizens support or opposition

to policy on the same, but is also an example of dynamics that exist between the

interrogator and interrogated.

Erikson’s theories of social development suggest that as humans develop and

grow there are specific achievement milestones that must be met. Failure to achieve

these milestones may result in an increase in individual and social stress. This theory

continues to be a cornerstone of psychological education and research as it provides an

accurate and convenient way to cluster group behaviors. The rationale for using this

theory is multitier. First, the cohort identified by Erikson is attempting to resolve

conflicts related to their impact on positive social change. Therefore, this age group is

attempting to do the right and just thing on a larger scale by focusing on society instead

of themselves. Furthermore, the rigid societal controls placed on individuals in this age

group can confound their attempts at resolving the conflict of overlapping milestones of

Intimacy, Isolation, Generativity, and Stagnation. Therefore, its relationship to both the

religious component and enhanced interrogation policy and could be reflective of their

adaptation to society.

The Just War theory was also considered during the literature review. This

theory, a classical theory of the conduct of war, implies a war is just if it is conducted

justly and the participants are just in their actions as long as they are honorable. The

concept is generally attributed to St. Augustine, as developed by Thomas Aquinas. This

theory has been the topic of reflection and opinion for as long as there has been human

conflict and is still applicable in the study and application of warfare today. This theory

is important because it sets the moral limits on warfare itself and those who engage in it.

This is a recurring theory throughout the literature and overlaps the other theories. Just

War theory is foundational to this research and because of its link to philosophy, law, and

religion. Over the course of this study it has served as guide in the quest of obtaining

thought provoking and meaningful data.

Kant’s universal law of nature is a morals based concept based on what Kant calls

the universal laws of nature. These laws guide human actions towards doing what is

good and avoidance of doing what is wrong or evil. Kant’s philosophy reinforces the

need for justice to ensure those who fight wars ought to do so morally. Kant’s

referencing justice and the concept of a higher-power make it an appropriate and

meaningful theory to include in this research.

The last theory considered during this literature review is Locke’s moral

motivation theory. This theory presents moral decision making as arising from a higher

power and as such requiring adherence to the law. Locke believes the failure to do so

should be met with sanctions to maintain social order. Locke, just as Kant, provides

insight and explores the interactions between motivation, maintaining societal norms, and

adherence to the influence and intent of a higher power. The moral motivation theory

relate to this study of enhanced interrogation through application of Freud’s

pleasureprinciple, i.e., an individual will choose the moral path as long as it is the least

painful and most rewarding.

Chapter 3 discusses the methodology used throughout this research. The elements

regarding population, design, and analysis methods will be explained to disclose how the

researcher will gather and the data and process the results. The development of the

survey instrument will be discussed to include the rationale behind the use of questions

from three different validated tools and how the instrument was tested and utilized. The

culmination of this will be how the collected data were collected and processed to ensure

accuracy and validity.

Chapter 3: Methodology

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to explore religiosity in the context of how this may

influence individual support or opposition to the use of enhanced interrogation on

terrorists and members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

An individual’s decision-making influences come from multiple factors that are both

intrinsic and extrinsic in nature. An individual adopts certain beliefs and ideas based on

these sources, which consequently influence his or her decisions (Hunt & King, 1971).

Religion continues to define and direct expected human behavior and interactions (Streib

& Hood, 2011). Therefore, whether it is a conscious part of decision making or not,

religion is a foundational component of value-based judgments (Barrett, 2001).

Consideration of the religious dimension was absent from the results of the U.S. Public

Opinion study on torture from 2001-2009 (Gronke et al., 2010). The reported factors that

influenced responses in this study were found to be cited as being a matter-of-fact

decision without any consideration of moral or religious beliefs as a potential influence

on their responses. This indicated a gap in the data based on an omitted variable and a

subsequent opportunity to determine how influential religious beliefs are, or are not,

involved in the decision-making process regarding the use of enhanced interrogation.

McAndrew and Voas (2011) reported that measuring religiosity using surveys is

complex and multidimensional. They also found that the reliability of data collected for

measuring religiosity, reported as “static” over time, is subject to change as a result of

social phenomena. This third-person effect can persuade or dissuade individuals from

basing their answers on how they internalize the question and postulate the response.

Instead, these individuals direct their attention elsewhere in order to influence what is

perceived as the majority opinion on the matter when indeed it actually is not (Davidson,

1983). Additionally, on two recent occasions, the news media discounted public opinion

poll data on enhanced interrogation, instead focusing attention on the partisan political

struggle to assign blame based on unrealistic interpretations of the data (Brander, 2014;

Gronke, 2010; Judicial Watch, 2014).

The information derived from this research is necessary due to the failure to

account for the influence of religion in the debate on enhanced interrogation (Gronke et

al., 2010). These research data should be used to address the unequal distribution of

religiosity among age groups, as well as U.S. citizens’ tolerance for the use of enhanced

interrogation techniques on captured U.S. Armed Forces personnel (Lippman &

McIntosh, 2010; ORC International, 2011).

The remaining sections of this chapter outline the methods used to conduct the

study, particularly the study design, data collection process, and data analysis methods.

This includes a discussion of the conceptual framework and scientific methodological

basis of the study. The research questionnaire design is discussed later in this chapter, as

are the pilot study questions used to validate the final survey model.

Research Design and Rationale

The study’s goal was accomplished using a quantitative, correlational study

design. The study used data collected from the participants to determine the existence of

a relationship between religiosity and an individual’s opinion on the use of enhanced

interrogation. The study examined subjects’ opinions on when the use of enhanced

interrogation is justifiable and where it is appropriate based on levels of personal

importance and religious commitment. The use of a quantitative correlational design was

determined to be the most appropriate based on the objective of the study. Quantitative

studies are conducted to determine the existence of statistically significant relationships

between variables (Cozby, 2007). In this particular correlational study, the relationship

between religiosity and support for the use of enhanced interrogation was examined. The

study’s attempt to reveal the existence of a relationship between a subject’s demographic

characteristics and support for the use of enhanced interrogation was successful for

Research Question 1 and inconclusive for the remaining questions (2, 3, and 4). The

demographics studied included gender, age, and religion among the unique group of 1834

year olds with current or previous military service compared with their opinion on the use

of enhanced interrogation on enemy soldiers and U.S. Armed Forces members captured

by enemy soldiers or fighters. The independent variables were the gender, age, and

religiosity reported by the subject, while the dependent variable was the use of enhanced

interrogation. The inspiration and motivation for this study was a hypothesis stating that

dimensions of religiosity are overlooked, misrepresented, and discounted by some in the

research, media, and public opinion polls. This research has a specific targeted audience

and is an original document. The knowledge gained in this project may contribute to

understanding for students, politicians, and researchers with regard to social policy

making.

In this study, the variables mentioned in the previous paragraph were quantified

using numerical data. The quantification of these variables allowed for the use of

different statistical procedures to determine the associations between the variables (Burns

& Grove, 2005). To examine the variables of religiosity and support for enhanced

interrogation in the study, independent sample t tests and correlation analysis were done

to assess the extent of influence the intervening variables of age, gender, and religiosity

had related to participants’ opinions on the use of enhanced interrogation techniques in

interrogation processes. Independent samples t tests were used to determine whether the

intervening variables account for differences in the respondents’ support for the use of

enhanced interrogation techniques for terrorists, suspected terrorists, and members of the

U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters. The statistical analysis was

also used to determine the relationship of the categorically measured independent

variable of gender to the continuous measured dependent variable of use of enhanced

interrogation for terrorists, suspected terrorists, and members of the U.S. Armed Forces

captured by enemy soldiers or fighters. Additionally, the results of the correlation

analysis were used to determine the existence of a relationship among age, religiosity,

and support for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists, suspected terrorists, and

members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

To complement the results of the previously mentioned analysis procedures,

regression analysis was conducted to investigate the predictive relationship between the

independent variables of religiosity, age, and gender and the dependent variables of

individual support or opposition to the use of enhanced interrogation, both on terrorists

and members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters. Linear

regression was used to determine the individual effect of each of the independent

variables of religiosity, age, and gender on the dependent variable in one model. The use

of a linear regression model allowed for the comparison of each independent variable.

A qualitative research design was considered, but it was not congruent with the

study’s purpose (Creswell, 2009). A qualitative study on this subject would focus on how

religiosity or religious beliefs affect perceptions on the use of enhanced interrogation.

The use of the correlational design was optimal for this study, as it allowed me to

investigate the existence of a linear relationship between the variables of religiosity and

scores ascribed to opinions on the use of enhanced interrogation in various instances

(Burns & Grove, 2005). The design choice was also appropriate because it allowed the

subjects to respond within the context of their natural state or milieu, as the survey was

completed anonymous over the Internet, which is an appropriate method for social

research (Knapp & Kirk, 2003; Meyerson & Tryon, 2003; Stanton, 1998). The subject

matter studied is important due to the relationship between this public policy research and

antiterrorism efforts in the United States as they relate to the Office of Homeland

Security. An advantage of this design for future research is that it reveals data that are

worthy of further research by expanding the population.

A sample size of at least 82 respondents, based on G*power computation, was

appropriate for the testing that was conducted to validate the research questions and

hypotheses. While the goal was to obtain a sample that is truly representative of the

population, data collection was done using a convenience sampling technique. The use of

convenience sampling techniques involves selecting readily available individuals to

participate in the study and continuing recruitment until the appropriate sample size has

been met or exceeded (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2013). The sampling strategy was

chosen based on my financial, logistical, and academic time constraints. Because this

convenience sampling strategy did not represent any group apart from itself, I cannot

claim to have a representative sample of the population being studied, and as such, the

results are not a concise representation of the group.

Due to the complexity of designing a relevant survey instrument, a Likert-type

survey instrument with 10 self-designed questions was created after the pilot study was

evaluated. The survey questionnaires were administered online, using an online survey

application. The survey was available 24 hours a day for 30 days. The time limit on the

availability of the survey was a self-imposed time constraint necessary to ensure the

conclusion of the study. The data were analyzed using t-test, correlational analysis, and

regression analysis to determine whether a relationship exists among the variables.

Testing to expose and determine the effects of the demographic data in relation to the

correlational data for inclusion was assessed. Sufficient technical writing throughout this

paper includes final charts, graphs, and figures to ensure that exact, step-by-step

replication of the results is possible. These are discussed in further detail in the

succeeding sections of this chapter. The data collected for this study used a Likert-type

scale which was appropriate due to the validity and reliability in allowing respondents

latitude to temper their agreement or disagreement in response to a question. A neutral

answer was not deemed appropriate for this research study or questionnaire. This

allowed for responses to be a closer reflection of participants’ genuine attitudes toward

the questions, which might not have been possible with fewer response options.

Restatement of Research Questions and Hypotheses

The purpose of the study was fulfilled through the resolution of the following

research questions and hypotheses:

RQ1: Is religiosity associated with support for the use of enhanced interrogation

techniques on terrorists and suspected terrorists?

H01: There is no statistically significant relationship between religiosity and

support for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorists and

suspected terrorists.

Ha1: There is a statistically significant relationship between religiosity and

support for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorists and

suspected terrorists.

RQ2: Is religiosity associated with support for the use of enhanced interrogation

techniques on members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy

soldiers or fighters?

H02: There is no statistically significant relationship between religiosity and

support for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on members of

the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

Ha2: There is a statistically significant relationship between religiosity and

support for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on members of

the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

RQ3: Are demographic intervening variables, particularly age and gender,

associated with support for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques

on terrorists and suspected terrorists?

H03: There is no statistically significant relationship between age and support

for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorists and

suspected terrorists.

Ha3: There is a statistically significant relationship between age and support for

the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorists and suspected

terrorists.

H04:

There is no statistically significant relationship between gender and

support for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorists and

suspected terrorists.

Ha4: There is a statistically significant relationship between gender and support

for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorists and

suspected terrorists.

RQ4: Are demographic independent variables, particularly age and gender,

associated with support for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques

on members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or

fighters?

H05: There is no statistically significant relationship between age and support

for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on members of the U.S.

Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

Ha5: There is a statistically significant relationship between age and support for

the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on members of the U.S.

Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

H06: There is no statistically significant relationship between gender and

support for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on members of

the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

Ha6: There is a statistically significant relationship between gender and support

for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on members of the U.S.

Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

Population

The target population for this study included U.S. citizens of both genders who

were between the ages of 18 and 34. The selection of this particular group was made in

consideration of the fact that despite the growth in religiosity from within the population

as a whole, research shows a growing trend among the younger generations, aged 18 to

34, away from affiliation with the larger religious traditions and even from any affiliation

at all (Rose, 2011). In addition, a survey conducted by the American Red Cross showed

that 59% of American youths and young adults showed support for the use of torture,

including practices described as “gruesome interrogation techniques”, while 41%

indicated that it is permissible for American troops to be tortured overseas. Because this

survey did not delineate the responses from among those with current or previous military

service self-designed questions will be used. This age cohort is also in line with

Erikson’s (1959) theory of psychosocial development, the period between the ages of 19

and 40 is known as the period of Generativity vs. Stagnation, wherein human beings

attempt to make decisions to help society move forward by creating positive social

change. This target population provided a pool for sampling that will allowed me to

compare the subjects and their opinions on the use of enhanced interrogation techniques

in relation to their age, gender and religiosity. Individuals from all possible religions

were included in the target population, and no cultural and/or racial restrictions were

implemented. This population has self-identified as both having a computer and

accessing the Internet 82% of the time (United States Census Bureau, 2013, p. 4). The

percentage of those using computers with Internet access is high which makes the use of

online survey a feasible mode for data collection.

Sampling and Sampling Procedures

Sampling was accomplished using the Internet-based Survey Monkey application.

Once sampling is conducted using this application, the respondents who meet the

inclusion criteria and are interested in participating in the study will be guided to a

webpage where the informed consent and study instrument is located. Based on the

power analysis conducted, a minimum number of sample of 82 respondents is optimal for

this study (See Appendix F for the G*Power results). This power analysis was conducted

using G*Power 3.1 on an a priori basis, and considered the following factors: a medium

effect size (0.3), a significance level of p = 0.05, and a desired power of 0.80. The

estimated power of the study will be set at 0.80 because this is considered adequate for

research studies (Ellis, 2010). The 82 sample requirement is the minimum based on the

power analysis. However, the study obtained 105 samples for inclusion into the data set.

However, exceeding the optimal sample size was possible but did not occur.

The power analysis conducted is considered a correlational analysis. The

statistical testing for correlations included all study variables to determine the

relationships between continuous measured variables, while the t-tests will be used to

determine the correlation of continuous measured dependent variables and categorically

dichotomous independent variables of the demographic characteristics. The regression

analysis will use age, gender and religiosity as the independent variables which influence

support for the use of enhanced interrogation as the dependent variable. Data analysis

will reveal any linear on nonlinear relationships, degree of variability in their distribution,

and differences between the groups.

Data Collection

As stated in the previous section, sampling was conducted using the Survey

Monkey Internet based survey service. I decided, based on the purpose of this study, the

only inclusion criteria that need be fulfilled are age, gender, and religiosity. Since this

study is focused on examining the views of U.S. citizens with current or prior military

service aged 18 to 34, sampling was focused on a convenient segment of society.

Demographics information collected from the participants were gender, age, race,

military branch, religion, and U.S. state or territory. It is recommended that

demographic information be solicited at the conclusion of the survey (Axinn, 2009).

To reach the survey, interested individuals were asked to click on a link that

directed them to the Survey Monkey page containing the survey instrument. Each survey

will display an electronic copy of the self-designed survey instrument along with a letter

of information and consent to participate in research. In this manner, informed consent

was obtained through a “read-and-acknowledge” statement that precedes the survey.

Consent was obtained prior to allowing the participants to access the survey on the survey

application website. Participants were issued a number corresponding with the order in

which their completed surveys were received. Participants could exit the survey at any

time by clicking the “Exit” button on the upper right side of the screen or by closing the

Internet browser window. No follow-ups will be required for this study.

As human participants were part of the study, it was ethically vital that I protect

the participants throughout the study. It should also be noted that prior to any form of

recruitment or data collection, approval from the Institution Review Board (IRB) was

obtained for both the pilot study and the final study. All ethical concerns were addressed

and all human rights were observed during the entire course of conducting this study. All

responses are and remain anonymous.

For this study and as required by Walden University, the participants were and

will remain protected through the informed consent form and confidentiality clause. The

informed consent form was used to ensure the participants are aware of their rights and

role in the study as well the conditions of the study. A description of the rationale of the

study, purpose of the study, and premise of the study, were included in the informed

consent and the informed consent preceded the on-line survey. Moreover, the informed

consent states that the participants have the right to withdraw from the study without any

penalty at any time by exiting as described above, which some took advantage of during

the survey. Participants who met the criteria and requirements of the study were assured

that their identities and personal information will be kept confidential all throughout the

study and post-research. Lastly, the participants were informed that in the interest of

maintaining anonymity, no personally identifiable information, addresses, or names will

be used at any point in the study.

Instrumentation and Operationalization of Constructs

Declining response rates to surveys have led methodologist to explore innovative

way to collect needed data (Axinn, 2009). In keeping with this innovation, a selfdesigned

instrument (See Appendix D) was used to collect the data for the study variables in order

to quantify their perceptions of enhanced interrogation. In particularly support for the use

of enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorists and suspected terrorists, and support

for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on members of the U.S. Armed Forces

captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

Items 1, 2 and 3 on the self-designed instrument asked the attitudes regarding the

utility of enhanced interrogations. These three items measured the dependent variable of

support for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorists and suspected

terrorists. Items 4 and 5 asked for opinions regarding the use of enhanced interrogation.

These two items will directly measure the dependent variable of support for the use of

enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorist and suspected terrorist and members of the

U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters. Lastly, items 6 to 10 asked

about religiosity. Summary and individual scores on the group items in the questionnaire

were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 22.0

to measure and analyze the data.

Since a self-developed questionnaire will be used, the research methods suggest

that it is necessary to implement a pilot test to assess the survey questions. Therefore,

samples from 16 participants from the target population were collected. The reliability

and validity of the pilot study questionnaire was assessed to ensure the constructs are

measured properly by the study questions. Using a four step measure, the results were

tested to gauge the validity and reliability of the questionnaire. The first step will be to

test external validity, including face and content validity. In this step, participants in the

pilot testing asked the participant to examine the whole questionnaire for overall

comprehension, clarity, perceived ambiguity, and potential difficulty in responding.

Specific questions to elicit feedback were asked to gauge this. The steps were as follows:

1) Are the questions clear and easy to understand, 2) do the questions lead you to choose

one answer over another, and 3) was there enough variety in the answer choices offered

for you to easily provide a response specific to you? The second step was to examine

internal validity. A correlation matrix was used to determine whether calculations could

be made to determine if two items could be correlated. Question items reflecting a low

correlation with other items will be reviewed for their theoretical importance and

removed if they offered no additional distinct domain of interest. In the third step,

reliability was determined through testing and retesting the survey, also known as

testretest reliability. In this step, the questions were asked twice; in the case of a survey

questionnaire this study will be using, the participants are given the same questionnaire

on two different occasions, in succession. If the correlation between separate

administrations of the test is high (0.7 or higher), then it has good test-retest reliability.

The goal of the test is to determine if the score of participants taken at one time, when

tested again later, has changed. Furthermore, if the test is deemed reliable, it will show

that no matter when the participants take the test, they will provide the same answers.

Finally, the fourth measure of validation was assessment of scale reliability. Cronbach’s

alpha coefficient was used to determine reliability in terms of internal consistency or the

average correlation. The results of the pilot study were integrated into the final set of

survey questions.

Data Analysis

Responses from the surveys were numerically coded based on date they are each

received. Once the data collection was complete all encoded data was input to SPSS 22

for statistical analysis. All of the digital data results will be encrypted and saved for a

period of at least 5 years.

As a form of preliminary analysis, descriptive statistics were derived. Measures

of central tendency, in particular, the mean, standard deviation, kurtosis and skewedness,

were calculated for age and the scores from the study instruments, which are continuous

variables. For the categorical variables of gender and religiosity, frequency and

percentage statistics were derived. Additionally, a reliability analysis was conducted to

validate the reliability of the survey instruments used for this study. Cronbach’s alpha

was used on the data gathered from the Likert-type questions answered by the

participants on the pilot study to determine the internal consistency of the scale used in

the study (Gliem & Gliem, 2003).

To address the research questions and hypotheses of the study, a correlational

analysis, independent samples t-tests, and a linear regression analysis between correlated

samples will be used. Correlation analysis was used as it will help determine how

strongly the variables of the study correlate with each other. Correlation analysis

procedure using Pearson’s correlation test will address Hypothesis 3 and 5, which

examine the relationship between age and support for the use of enhanced interrogation

techniques on terrorist and suspected members; and between age and support for the use

of enhanced interrogation techniques on members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by

enemy soldiers or fighters.

The results of the correlation analysis was also be used to address Hypotheses 1

and 2 to determine the existence of a relationship between the main variables of the study,

religiosity, with support for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorists and

suspected terrorists, and between religiosity and support for the use of torture on

members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldier or fighters.

Pearson’s correlation analysis was conducted on the variables that are continuous. If the

p-value of the correlation coefficient is greater than 0.05, then the null hypothesis is

validated and no further interpretation is needed. If the p-value of the correlation

coefficient is less than 0.05, then this indicates a statistically significant relationship

between the variables. Interpretation of the data involved an assessment of the

relationship between the variables (direct or inverse, as exhibited by the positive or

negative sign of the correlation coefficient), and the strength of the relationship, which is

quantified by the numerical value of the correlation coefficient.

Independent sample t-tests helped to identify whether there is a statistical

difference between two variables/groups and this analysis was used to address

Hypotheses 4 and 6. The research questions and hypotheses are focused on determining

whether the gender of the respondents account for statistically significant differences in

their support for the use of enhanced interrogation for terrorist and members of the U.S.

Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters. T-test was conducted on the

dependent variable when it is continuous and when the independent variable is

categorical with dichotomous responses only. Gender (male or female) qualified for use

as the independent variable as compared with the dependent variables of support for the

use of enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorists and suspected terrorists and support

for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on members of the U.S. Armed Forces

captured by enemy soldiers or fighters. The respondents will be classified based on the

demographic groupings of gender, and the mean scores of each group for the variable of

support for the use of enhanced interrogation will be compared. A statistically significant

difference between the groups will indicate that the demographic characteristic of gender

account for the differences in the perceptions of these groups on the use of enhanced

interrogation. If the p-value of the t-test is less than 0.05, then this indicates a statistically

significant difference in the support for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on

terrorists and suspected terrorists and support for the use of enhanced interrogation

techniques on members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters

between the two gender groups.

The first and second research questions focus on the individual perceptions

between religiosity and support for enhanced interrogation. This is followed by the third

and fourth research questions which focus attention on demographic components, the

association of age and gender to support for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques

on terrorists, suspected terrorists, and members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by

enemy soldiers or fighters.

To further investigate the relationships between the variables, linear regression

analysis was conducted. The linear regression analysis used age, gender and religiosity as

the predictor variables to measure the support for the use of enhanced interrogation

techniques on terrorists and suspected terrorists and support for the use of enhanced

interrogation techniques on members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy

soldiers or fighters, respectively, as the dependent variables. Separate regression models

were created for each of the scores for support for the use of enhanced interrogation

techniques on terrorists and suspected terrorists and support for the use of enhanced

interrogation techniques on members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy

soldiers or fighters. The linear regression analysis tested the model to determine if age,

gender and religiosity could predict support or opposition for the use of enhanced

interrogation on terrorists and suspected terrorists and members of the U.S. Armed Forces

captured by enemy soldiers or fighters. The results of the linear regression analysis serve

as the basis used to determine if age, gender or religiosities are statistically significant

predictors of the dependent variable, or the support for the use of enhanced interrogation

techniques. Results of the analysis are presented in Chapter 5.

Threats to Validity

Avoidance of single group threats is possible, as the limitations involve the 18 to

34 age group as part of the requirements in order to become a participant; multiple group

threats were also possible considering dimensions of the study include demographics and

religious groups (affiliations), which vary widely and may be generalizable in terms of

exposure to and consistency of religious doctrine (e.g. golden-rule). Social-threats to

internal validity on this topic can change in an instant due to the level of information the

participant has on the subject matter, which can impact the influence of religiosity on

their decision to support using enhanced interrogation techniques as a means of gaining

compliance during information gathering operations. Depending on when the survey

reached the participant and what exposure they had to news reports (as well as their own

personal experience), supposing a terrorism related story is not being revisited or visited

for the first time would all likely affect their opinion on the matter.

Determining a relationship between religiosity and unconditional support for

enhanced interrogation techniques is a limitation of the study and may be influenced by

intervening variables, a variation that might be explained by gender, race, or sex.

Arguably, this study could not be generalizable to other issues or constructs due to the

relationship between the variables. In addition, it should be noted that the sampling

strategy used may have hindered my obtaining a truly representative sample. However,

due to constraints of time and resources, the convenience sampling strategy was

determined to be the most effective means for recruiting respondents. The failure to

obtain a truly representative sample from 18-34 years old who have current or previous

military service will be discussed as a limitation of the study. Despite this limitation, the

findings of this study will be the first step towards examining the critical role played by

religiosity in influencing public beliefs on enhanced interrogation with this unique group.

Lastly, using the Survey Monkey Internet based survey application is considered a

limitation because of its limited accessibility to those without computer and Internet

access. Additionally, some respondents skipped questions and exited the survey early

which limited the accuracy and significance of the study in some areas. The respondents

may not have provided accurate information as well as giving a false age, gender, and

other personal information may compromise the validity of the data provided by them.

With this in mind, this may cause the data results to become inaccurate.

Ethical Concerns

Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was obtained prior to my conducting

any recruitment or data collection for the study. It should be noted that the data

collection procedures discussed in the previous section were implemented. The data were

scrubbed in an attempt to maintain anonymity and stringent measures taken to ensure

confidentiality through password protection and no release of data or access beyond

myself unless required by Walden University. Apart from age and gender, no personally

identifiable information was collected from the participants. No one shall have access to

the protected data except for me. Similarly, I will be the sole administrator of the Survey

Monkey website that will be used to collect data. All electronic copies of the data are

encrypted and password protected while in use and a back-up copy of all the files will be

saved on a flash drive and secured in the locked filing cabinet with any hard copies of the

data that remain. Strict adherence to the physical security of data via encryption

technology and password use will be maintained until the data collected is destroyed.

After 5 years, all remaining paper files will be shredded and all digital data will be

permanently deleted.

Summary

The purpose of this study was to explore the correlation between religiosity in the

context of how this may influence individual support or opposition to the use of enhanced

interrogation on terrorists and members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy

soldiers or fighters. To achieve this purpose, I explored the question of how religion may

influence an individual’s support for or opposition to the use of enhanced interrogation

techniques on terrorists or members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy

soldiers or fighters. The data were collected from a convenience sample using the Survey

Monkey application using a self-designed instrument. The collected data were analyzed

using SPSS v22.0 for correlation, independent sample t-tests, and regression analysis.

Chapter 4: Results

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to explore religiosity in the context of how this may

influence individual support or opposition to the use of enhanced interrogation on

terrorists and members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

This quantitative study drew a convenience sampling of the U.S. population from the

Survey Monkey Internet survey application using a self-designed instrument. The study’s

focus was limited to adult male and female citizens of the United States between

the ages of 18 and 34 with current or prior military service.

The data were collected from the website using a self-designed instrument. I

initially conducted a pilot study using the responses from 16 participants to test the

intended instrument. The pilot study included three evaluation questions that tested the

validity and reliability of the self-designed questionnaire. Participant feedback on the 10

study questions was provided upon completion of the pilot survey. The responses from

this feedback were evaluated using a four-step approach to measure threats to internal and

external validity using correlation matrices and reliability through testing-retesting and

strength of Cronbach’s alpha score. The Cronbach’s alpha score results proved to be an

effective standard measure to use in evaluating the survey questions prior to

implementing the final questionnaire. Based on the results of the pilot study, the

questions were determined to be valid and reliable for the purposes of this study and were

incorporated into the main study without any modifications or changes. The basis for

calculations was derived from the SPSS v.22 program and assumed a model-based

approach when making statistical inferences.

The following research questions and hypotheses were used to guide this study:

RQ1: Is religiosity associated with support for the use of enhanced interrogation

on terrorists and suspected terrorists?

H01: There is no statistically significant relationship between religiosity and

support for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected

terrorists.

Ha1: There is a statistically significant relationship between religiosity and

support for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected

terrorists.

RQ2: Is religiosity associated with support for the use of enhanced interrogation

on members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or

fighters?

H02: There is no statistically significant relationship between religiosity and

support for the use of enhanced interrogation on members of the U.S.

Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

Ha2: There is a statistically significant relationship between religiosity and

support for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on members of

the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

RQ3: Are demographic variables, particularly age and gender, associated with

support for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected

terrorists?

H03: There is no statistically significant relationship between age and support

for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected terrorists.

Ha3: There is a statistically significant relationship between age and support for

the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected terrorists.

H04:

There is no statistically significant relationship between gender and

support for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected

terrorists.

Ha4: There is a statistically significant relationship between gender and support

for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected terrorists.

RQ4: Are demographic variables, particularly age and gender, associated with

support for the use of enhanced interrogation on members of the U.S.

Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters?

H05: There is no statistically significant relationship between age and support

for the use of enhanced interrogation on members of the U.S. Armed

Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

Ha5:

There is a statistically significant relationship between age and support for

the use of enhanced interrogation on members of the U.S. Armed Forces

captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

H06: There is no statistically significant relationship between gender and

support for the use of enhanced interrogation on members of the U.S.

Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

Ha6: There is a statistically significant relationship between gender and support

for the use of enhanced interrogation on members of the U.S. Armed

Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

The remainder of the chapter covers the data collection process, starting with the

pilot study and evaluation. Next, the participation and completion rates of the study are

presented. This is followed by the statistical analysis procedures and presentation of the

data.

Data Collection Process

The instrument for data collection was a self-designed survey (see Appendix D).

Prior to data collection, the self-designed survey was pilot tested (see Appendix B). The

pilot survey consisted of 20 Likert-type scale questions to gauge agreement or

disagreement with a question or statement and three instrument evaluation questions.

The first 10 questions on the pilot instrument were the candidate questions for the final

study, and the remaining 10 were included for reliability testing of the instrument. The

answer options ranged from complete agreement to complete disagreement. The middle

scale answers offered participants who leaned more toward or away from a total

commitment answer the option of choosing a mostly agree or mostly disagree response.

Additionally, response options were provided that allowed for a choice of either

ambiguity (I don’t know) or avoidance (I prefer not to answer). These answer choices

were designed to reduce anxiety and allow respondents to bypass a question and move

forward through the survey without being compelled to provide an inaccurate answer or

no answer at all. In addition to these 20 questions, the pilot survey contained an

additional three instrument evaluation questions. These were included as part of the

fourstep measure to gauge the instrument’s questions for appropriateness, validity, and

reliability. Finally, six questions were included in the questionnaire to capture the

appropriate demographic data that were significant to the research study.

Pilot Study Evaluation

The first step in evaluation of the pilot study was to test external validity by

asking respondents three evaluation questions to concerning the instrument’s

comprehensibility, clarity, and ambiguity. The questions asked were the following:

1. Are the questions clear and easy to understand?

2. Do the questions lead you to choose one answer over another?

3. Was there enough variety in the answer choices offered for you to easily

provide a response specific to you?

For each question asked, an array of response options were offered, including definitely

true, tends to be true, sometimes true, tends not to be true, definitely not true, and a

choice to not answer the question.

For the evaluation of the pilot study to be a reasonable representation of the final

study, a response rate of 10% of the statically significant responses of 82 was needed.

The results from at least 10 participants were needed to provide an acceptable evaluation

of the pilot study. This requirement was exceed by the actual number of responses to the

pilot, of which there were a total of 16. However, two of the respondents dropped out

before completing the evaluation of the survey.

Of the 14 participants who did evaluate the instrument, 13 indicated that the

questions were clear and easy to understand. Additionally, nine indicated that the

questions were unambiguous while another nine agreed the variety of response options

from which to choose as appropriate. In testing for internal validity, 14 respondents

indicated that 92.85% of the time the questions asked about something they had formed

an opinion on. Furthermore, 64.29% felt that the answers closely resembled what their

response would have been if they had postulated an answer on their own. The data

indicated that the pilot tested survey questions were valid as taken directly from the

source instruments: the DUREL, the PRRI/RNS, and the ARC Survey on International

Humanitarian Law.

For the pilot study to prove reliability, two methods were used: test/retest and

Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. The two constructs measures were the opinions on the use

of enhanced interrogation and the degree of religiosity. Because the questions were

selectively taken from three different surveys, using three different types of coding it was

impossible to calculate a combined Cronbach’s alpha score for the instrument in its

entirety. However, there were two sets of questions that were taken from the same

instrument, the ARC survey (questions four and five) and the DUREL (questions 8, 9,

and 10), which provided alpha scores of .347 and .700, respectively. The DUREL

questions met the accepted minimum level of reliability; however, the ARC survey

questions used did not. However, the results from the ARC remain consistent with the

tested hypothesis as evidenced by the response choices made, which closely align with

the ARC published results. The pronounced variance introduced by the self-designed

instruments required inclusion of an option to not answer the question and move on to the

next one, which is the accepted cause for this. The second test for reliability

demonstrated an 87.8% correlation in responses. These tests of reliability, when

examined within the context of the primary sources from which they were taken along

with the results presented here indicated the scale reliability of the questions were valid.

As a result of the data collected and analyzed, the instrument was determined to be within

the acceptable limits of a valid and reliable instrument for a study of this nature. No

changes were made to the final set of survey questions. In the remainder of this section, I

discuss the data collection process, considerations, and results of the statistical analysis.

Participation and Completion

The study participants were conveniently recruited through social media on the

Internet, in printed periodicals, on local bulletin boards and by word of mouth. This was

accomplished by advertising through LinkedIn promotions (“impressions”), Facebook

campaign postings, sheets of pull-tab bulletin board flyers, and a weekend run in both the

local military base paper The Signature and the European/Pacific editions of the Stars &

Stripes. All advertisements directed potential participants to the Survey Monkey

application website, where the informed consent and survey instrument were found.

Because of the wide variability in readership of circulated editions and online

participation, an accurate response rate could not be calculated.

There were a total of 105 individual participants in the study, including the 16

from the pilot study. Of all the responses received, 100% provided an answer to the first

question, 98% answered the second, 95% answered the third, 93% answered the fourth,

and 92% answered the remaining six questions. This yielded a 98.3% survey completion

rate. During completion of the demographics section of the study, the dropout rate was

much higher. This occurred despite numerous indications in the literature that suggested

that placing this section at the end of a survey would minimize the effects of respondent

fatigue. As indicated above, for the remainder of the survey, eight participants remained

out after question four. When asked to report their demographic information, 16

participants failed to make an age and race or ethnicity selection, while for gender and

religious affiliation 10 participants did not provide an answer. The remaining two

demographic questions concerning branch of military service and state of legal residence

received no answers from just 11 participants.

The time frame used to collect the survey data was not to exceed 30 days. There

was a calculated threshold of 82 respondents needed to ensure statistical significance.

This requirement is based on the reported number of U.S. Armed Forces personnel on

active duty between the ages of 18-34 (n = 796,234) with a calculated confidence interval

of 95% (Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, 2014). While the survey

was ended within the 30 day window, the threshold of respondents fell short in some

demographic areas due to drop out and skipped questions. The survey ended at the 30

day point after which it will be closed and not accessible for data collection. The

remainder of this chapter will present data specific to each question and statistical

analysis of the data. Out of necessity, the questions will be analyzed independently, in

clusters, and as a whole. This is due to the three independent variables being measured

independently against the dependent variable and the variances between the Likert-type

scale between the groups. The analysis will include descriptive measures of Pearson’s

correlation, T-testing, and regression. Data will first be presented as most frequent

responses to the question on the instrument followed by demographic frequencies,

individual measures and measures in combined groups for correlations and

statistical results.

Frequent Themes

The most frequently selected answers to the questions are presented below. In

terms of the scoring of the independent variables of age, gender, and religiosity and the

dependent variable of enhanced interrogation, the sum of the individual questions for the

questionnaires measuring each variable were obtained will be presented later in this

section.

1. Completely disagree: Using enhanced interrogation techniques against suspect

terrorist in order to gain important information can never be justified.

2. Critical information: Thinking about how the U.S. was able to locate Osama

Bin Laden, do you think the use of harsh interrogation techniques such as

water boarding of suspect terrorist provided critical information, some

important but not critical information, little important information or no

important information?

3. Statement 1: Of the following two statements, which one is closer to your own

views, even if neither is exactly right.

4. Statement 1: In these dangerous times, it is justifiable for our government to

use methods against our enemies that we would not want used on American

soldiers.

5. Statement 2: Even in these dangerous times, our government should follow

unchanging principles like the Golden Rule. We should NEVER use methods

against our enemies that we would not want used on American soldiers.

6. Acceptable in some circumstances: To what extent is it acceptable for soldiers

and fighters to take the following action, please tell me if it is always

acceptable, is acceptable in some circumstances, or if it is never acceptable:

Using enhanced interrogation techniques on captured enemy soldiers or

fighters in order to get important military information.

7. Never acceptable: From what you know, if an American soldier who has

important military information is captured, is it acceptable for enemy soldiers

to use enhanced interrogation techniques on the soldier to get that

information? Would you say it is:

8. Never: Please answer the following questions about your religious beliefs

and/or involvement. How often do you attend church or other religious

meetings?

9. Never: How often do you spend time in private religious activities, such as

prayer, meditation or Bible study?

10. Definitely true of me: The following section contains 3 statements about

religious belief or experience. Please mark the extent to which each statement

is true or not true for you: In my life, I experience the presence of the Divine

(i.e., God).

11. Tends to be true: My religious beliefs are what really lie behind my whole

approach to life.

12. Definitely not true: I try hard to carry my religion over into all other dealings

in life.

Descriptive and Frequency Statistics of the Variables

The descriptive statistics included the basic univariate analysis of frequency,

percent, mean, standard deviation and coefficient of variance. The descriptive statistics

of the independent variables of age, gender and religiosity, the dependent variable of

enhance interrogation were obtained. These variables were essential in order to

characterize the research questions and alternate hypotheses of this study in terms of the

sample studied. Reliability measure of central tendency and variability for each question

were also calculated to determining the uniformity of the answer choices presented

through the coefficient of variation (CV = SD/M). This was used to determine if the

results are closer to the ideal 0, or contain greater variability, being closer to 1. Questions

1, 4, 5, 6, and 10 showed the least variation while questions 2, 3, 7, 8, & 9 showed the

most (see Tables 1 & 2).

Table 1

Frequency and Percentages

Table 2

Descriptive

Statistics

Frequency Percent

Gender

Male 64 61%

Female 31 39%

Missing 10 9.5%

Age

20 1 .9%

22 4 3.8%

25 5 4.8%

26 4 3.8%

27 2 2%

28 4 3.8%

29 8 7.6%

30 2 2%

31 4 3.8%

32 4 3.8%

33 4 3.8%

34 40 38.1%

Missing 23 22%

Ethnicity

Hispanic or Latino 7 6.7%

Asian 3 2.8%

Black or African American 9 8.5%

Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 3 2.8%

White 70 66.7%

Race/Ethnicity Unknown 1 .9%

Prefer not to answer 2 1.9%

Missing 10 9.5%

Religious affiliation

Protestant/Other Christian 48 45.7%

Catholic 19 18.1%

Other nonChristian 1 0.9%

No religious identity 26 24.7%

Prefer not to answer 1 0.9%

Missing

Branch of military service

10 9.5%

Army 9 8.6%

Navy 65 62%

Air Force 10 9.5%

Marines 2 1.9%

Coast Guard 1 0.9%

None 7 6.7%

Missing 11 10.5%

N Range Minimum Maximum Mean Std. deviation Variance

105 4.00 1.00 5.00 3.6190 .12358 1.603

Q2 103 5.00 1.00 6.00 2.0874 .15738 2.551

Q3 100 5.00 1.00 6.00 1.7400 .11859 1.406

Q4 98 5.00 1.00 6.00 2.2245 .09679 .918

Q5 97 5.00 1.00 6.00 3.1443 .13979 1.896

Q6 97 4.00 1.00 5.00 3.0309 .15402 2.302

Q7 97 5.00 1.00 6.00 3.4227 .20032 3.892

Q8 97 5.00 1.00 6.00 2.6082 .16422 2.616

Q9 97 5.00 1.00 6.00 2.9897 .15335 2.281

Q10 97 5.00 1.00 6.00 3.1134 .15008 2.185

Test of Normality

Prior to performing the Pearson’s correlation test, normality testing was conducted

in order to determine the distribution characteristics of the data. Relevancy of the

Pearson’s correlation is dependent upon normal distribution of the data. Data will be

examined for excessive skewness, being less than negative one or greater than positive

one, or excess kurtosis, data that exhibits dramatic excursions from zero or show little

variability in the data set spread out across a spectrum.

The skew and kurtosis values summarized in Table 3 indicated that the skewness

(range between -.462 and 2.079) and kurtosis (range between-1.553 and 4.236) fall

beyond three times the standard error for skewness (range between -.462 and 2.079) and

for kurtosis (range between-1.553 and 4.236) indicating a nonsymmetrical curve of data

towards the right and violation of the normal distribution curve.

Table 3

Skewness and Kurtosis

n Skewness Kurtosis

105 -.462 -.771

Q2 103 1.577 1.339

Q3 100 2.079 4.236

Q4 98 1.111 1.997

Q5 97 .102 -.680

Q6 97 -0.17 -1.428

Q7 97 .180 -1.553

Q8 97 .465 -1.193

Q9 97 .203 -1.243

Q10 97 .038 -1.318

t Testing

t testing of the means between the variables for significance was accomplished by

comparing the independent variables of gender with enhanced interrogation. This was

the only independent variable that consisted of two categorical, independent groups of

female and male participants with a confidence interval of 95% (see Table 4).

Table 4

One-Sample t Test

95% CI

t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean difference LL UL

29.286 104 .000 3.61905 3.3740 3.8641

Q2 13.263 102 .000 2.08738 1.7752 2.3995

Q3 14.672 99 .000 1.74000 1.5047 1.9753

Q4 22.982 97 .000 2.22449 2.0324 2.4166

Q5 22.493 96 .000 3.14433 2.8668 3.4218

Q6 19.679 96 .000 3.0393 2.7252 3.3367

Q7 17.086 96 .000 3.42268 3.0250 3.8203

Q8 15.883 96 .000 2.60825 2.2823 2.9342

Q9 19.496 96 .000 2.98969 2.6853 3.2941

Q10 20.745 96 .000 3.11340 2.8155 3.4113

The independent sample t-test results from the study found that the means

between the females and males did not differ significantly (.≤ .05) on either of the

research questions.

Correlational Relationships

The Pearson’s correlation was calculated to determine how well the independent

variables of gender, age, and religiosity related to the questions asked. The data were

analyzed within the context of the individual questions to determine effect size. A level

of significance of 0.05 was used in the hypotheses testing and if the p-values was found

to be less than or equal to this it was determined a relationship of significance exists

between the variables. The Pearson’s test also determined the magnitude and direction of

the correlation (see Table 5).

Table 5

Pearson's Correlation

Age

Pearson’s correlation

Q4 Q5

-0.204 -.142

Sig. (2-tailed) 0.64 .200

N 83 83

Gender Pearson’s correlation 0.72 .136

Sig. (2-tailed) 0.486 .187

N 95 95

Religiosity Pearson’s correlation .366* .139

Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000 .178

N 95 95

*Correlation significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

The results of the Pearson’s correlation test for age, gender, and religiosity and

support for (Q4) the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists or suspected terrorist, and

(Q5) support for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on captured U.S. Armed

Forces personnel were summarized in Table 3.

The results for Q4 showed that for age (r (83) = -0.204, 0.64) there was a weak

negative correlation, for gender (r (95) = 0.72, 0.486) there was a weak to moderate

positive correlation, and for religiosity (r (95) = .366, 0.000) there was a significant

positive correlation. For Q5 the results show for age (r (83) = -0.142, 0.200) there was a

weak negative correlation, for gender (r (95) = 0.136, 0.187) there was a weak to

moderate positive correlation, and for religiosity (r (95) = .139, .178) there was a

moderate positive correlation. The most significant relationship from the data were

between religiosity and Q4.

Multiple Linear Regression Analysis

Multiple regression plots were generated using to determine the relationship

between the research questions and the independent variables of age, gender, and

religiosity. The assumptions of a continuous interval, linear relationship, no significant

outliers, independence, distribution, and heteroscedasticity were considered in the

performance of this test despite tenuous adherence to some and none to others. A level of

significance of 0.05 was used in the hypotheses testing and if the p-values was found to

be less than or equal to this it would indicate that the regression model predicts the

dependent variable with a high degree of accuracy.

The multiple regression model indicated a less than statistically significant

regression model in predicting support for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorist

and suspected terrorist at (r = .417) with a total variation in the dependent variable of 17.4

%. Furthermore, the regression model predicted the outcome of support for the use of

enhanced interrogation on captured U.S. Armed Forces personnel with an even lower

correlation (r = .212) and predictability level of 4.5%. These results are indicative of the

uneven distribution of the independent variables and other assumptions that were not

within acceptable parameters to achieve correlation. The SPSS v.22.0 includes an

algorithm that automatically estimates the means of the top ten most significant effects

from the data analysis.

Summary

In conclusion, this quantitative study examined data collected to determine if a

relationship might exist between the independent variables of age, gender, and religiosity

with the dependent variable of support for enhanced interrogation. The data were

collected from participants 24 hours a day from across the globe during a 30 day period

and in order to ensure established IRB criteria and participant anonymity no specific date,

time, or physical location information that could be associated with the participant were

collected or retained. The demographic data from the survey presented in Table 1 reveals

most respondents to be white, male, 34 years of age, belonging to protestant or other

Christian religion, and having prior or current service in the U.S. Navy. Table 2 presents

the raw data from the demographics questions while Table 3 presents the raw data

calculated from the weighted responses, which was discussed in the frequent themes

section of this chapter.

The descriptive statistics provide here characterized the participant responses

through frequency and statistical analysis. This included correlation analysis through

Pearson’s correlation, T-testing, and linear regression. Prior to this, the data were tested

for normality, skewness, and kurtosis. Of the six research hypotheses in this study,

religiosity and support for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorist and suspected

terrorists received the most statistically significant support. While this survey measured

level of support for enhanced interrogation across a spectrum, the majority of support for

the undefined circumstantial use of enhanced interrogation found that only 8 out of the

105 participants opposed it. However, when asked if they thought waterboarding a

terrorist would result in information of value only 34.75% believed it would. As the

political and academic interest in this subject has remained steady so have the polls and

surveys of public opinion despite reports of past mismanagement by the government and

collusion experts in psychology. The results from this study validated the prevailing

mixed opinion between the value of information gained from enhanced interrogation

while simultaneously showing overwhelming support for its use when compared with

public support for the circumstantial use of enhanced interrogation at 51-59% in the

American Red Cross survey and 67% in the Public Religion Research Institute survey

(American Red Cross, 2011; Public Religion Research Institute, 2011).

Chapter 5 will include an overview, summary, and interpretation of the findings of

the study and their implications for social change. As will be discussed, the model

assumed a normal distribution of data and that one variable will function as another. Also

discussed will be the limitations of the study, recommendations for future research, and

conclusion.

Chapter 5: Results and Conclusions

Overview

The purpose of this quantitative study was to determine the relationship between a

person’s religiosity and his or her support for the use of enhanced interrogation. Current

research in this area was found to be lacking information on a connection among the

variables of religiosity, age, gender, and support for enhanced interrogations. As a result,

the nature of this study involved exploring the relationship among these variables as

collected from a convenience sample of participants aged 18-34 years with current or

former service in the U.S. Armed Forces.

In Chapter 4, the population and data collected for the study were presented. Also

presented were the results of the descriptive and analytical computations associated with

the findings. The remainder of this chapter presents the summary and interpretation of

the findings, the limitations of the study, and recommendations for future research.

Along with this is a discussion concerning the study’s implications for social change and

a conclusion.

Summary and Interpretation

The sample for the study was composed of 105 anonymous participants identified

as having current or former service in the U.S. Armed Forces and being between the ages

of 18 and 34. The demographic information presented indicated that a majority of the

participants self-identified as being male (64%), were at the higher end of the age

spectrum (34 years old), indicated a race/ethnicity of White (n = 70), and had a

Protestant/Other Christian religious affiliation (n = 48). The duration of the study was

not to exceed 30 days without limits placed on the number of participants who could

respond. The data analyses were conducted for the purpose of establishing a link

between age, gender, and religiosity and enhanced interrogation. A level of significance

of 0.05 was used in the hypothesis testing with a confidence interval of 95%. A

significant relationship existed once the p-value was found to be less than or equal to the

level of significance value. The key finding of the study was a statistically significant

relationship between religiosity and support for the use of enhanced interrogation on

terrorists and suspected terrorists. The data concerning the other questions asked in this

study yielded insufficient statistical support to reject the null hypothesis. Reduction of

the limitations that influenced the results of this study is recommended for future

research. The remainder of this section contains an interpretation of the data analysis

findings from Chapter 4.

Research Question 1

The first research question concerned whether religiosity was associated with

support for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected terrorists. The

process of investigating this question involved creating a null hypothesis (H01)

suggesting that there is no statistically significant relationship between religiosity and

support for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected terrorists, as well

as an alternate hypothesis (Ha1) suggesting that there is a statistically significant

relationship between religiosity and support for the use of enhanced interrogation on

terrorists and suspected terrorists. These hypotheses were tested using the Pearson

correlation analysis.

The results of the Pearson’s correlation test for religiosity and support for the use

of enhanced interrogation on terrorists or suspected terrorist (r (95) = .366, 0.000)

indicated a significant positive correlation. This was the most statistically significant

correlational relationship expressed in the data based on the p-value being greater than

0.05 level of significance. This provided evidence to support the rejection of the null

hypothesis (H01): There is no statistically significant relationship between religiosity and

support for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorists and suspected

terrorists.

Research Question 2

The second research question concerned whether or not religiosity is associated

with support for the use of enhanced interrogation on members of the U.S. Armed Forces

captured by enemy soldiers or fighters. The process of investigating this question

involved creating a null hypothesis (H02) stating that there is no statistically significant

relationship between religiosity and support for the use of enhanced interrogation on

members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters, as well as an

alternate hypothesis (Ha2) suggesting that there is a statistically significant relationship

between religiosity and support for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and

suspected terrorists. These hypotheses were tested using Pearson correlation analysis.

The results of the Pearson’s correlation test for religiosity and support for the use

of enhanced interrogation on members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy

soldiers or fighters (r (95) = .139, .178) provided insufficient evidence to support an

association between support for the use of enhanced interrogation on members of the U.S.

Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters and religiosity based on the pvalue

being greater than the 0.05 level of significance. This provided evidence to accept the

null hypothesis, H02: There is no statistically significant relationship between religiosity

and support for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on members of the U.S.

Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

Research Question 3

The third research question concerned whether or not demographic variables,

particularly age and gender, were associated with support for the use of enhanced

interrogation on terrorists and suspected terrorists. The process of investigating this

question involved creating null hypotheses, H03 and H04, and alternate hypotheses, Ha3

and Ha4. Null Hypothesis H03 stated that there is no statistically significant relationship

between age and support for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected

terrorists, and Null Hypothesis H04 stated that there is no statistically significant

relationship between gender and support for the use of enhanced interrogation on

terrorists and suspected terrorists. Conversely, Alternate Hypotheses Ha3 and Ha4

indicated that there is a statistically significant relationship between age and gender and

support for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected terrorists. These

hypotheses were tested using Pearson correlation analysis.

The results of the Pearson’s correlation test for age associated with support for the

use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected terrorists (r (83) = -0.204, 0.64)

provided insufficient evidence to support an association between age and support for the

use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected terrorists. The results of the test

for gender associated with support for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and

suspected terrorists (r (95) = 0.72, 0.486) provided insufficient evidence in support of an

association. For both age and gender, there was no statistical support for the use of

enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected terrorists based on the p-value being

greater than the 0.05 level of significance. Acceptance of both Null Hypotheses H03

(There is no statistically significant relationship between age and support for the use of

enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorists and suspected terrorists) and H04 (There

is no statistically significant relationship between gender and support for the use of

enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorists and suspected terrorists) is indicated.

Research Question 4

The fourth research question concerned whether or not demographic variables,

particularly age and gender, were associated with support for the use of enhanced

interrogation on members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or

fighters. The process of investigating this question involved creating Null Hypotheses

Ho5 and Ho6 and Alternate Hypotheses Ha5 and Ha6. Null Hypothesis Ho5 stated that

there is no statistically significant relationship between age and support for the use of

enhanced interrogation on members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy

soldiers or fighters, and Null Hypothesis Ho6 stated that there is no statistically

significant relationship between gender and support for the use of enhanced interrogation

on members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters.

Conversely, Alternate Hypotheses Ha5 and Ha6 indicated that there is a statistically

significant relationship between age and gender and support for the use of enhanced

interrogation on members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or

fighters. These hypotheses were tested using Pearson correlation analysis.

The results of the Pearson’s correlation test for age associated with support for the

use of enhanced interrogation on members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy

soldiers or fighters (r (83) = -0.142, 0.200) provided insufficient evidence to support an

association between age and support for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists

and suspected terrorists. The results of the test for gender associated with support for the

use of enhanced interrogation on terrorists and suspected terrorists (r (95) = 0.136, 0.187)

provided insufficient evidence in support of an association between both age and gender.

For both age and gender, there was no statistical support for the use of enhanced

interrogation on terrorists and suspected terrorists based on the p-value being greater than

the 0.05 level of significance. Acceptance of both Null Hypotheses H05 (There is no

statistically significant relationship between age and support for the use of enhanced

interrogation techniques on members of the U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy

soldiers or fighters) and H06 (There is no statistically significant relationship between

gender and support for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on members of the

U.S. Armed Forces captured by enemy soldiers or fighters) is indicated.

The findings of this research confirm the findings from the peer-reviewed

literature cited in Chapter 2. The majority view of the respondents in this study supported

the following:

1. The majority of U.S. citizens support the use of enhanced interrogation on

terrorists or suspected terrorists (Gronke et al., 2010).

2. Those who attend church more frequently are more likely to support the

use of enhanced interrogation (PEW, 2009b).

3. There is a growing number of young adults who are unaffiliated with a

religion yet report being spiritual (PEW, 2012; Spalek & Imtoual, 2008).

Limitations of Study

The assumptions of a normal distribution, a structural relationship between the

variables, and a cross-variable distribution made at the beginning of this study were

chosen to allow for inferences to be made concerning the results. However, the lack of

available participants and missing data from the participants who responded to only some

of the questions proved these assumptions to be false. As discussed in subsequent

sections, had more data been made available, the quality and accuracy of the calculations

could have yielded results more appropriate to generalization to the population as a

whole.

The study focused on a cohort with military experience; therefore, one could

assume some bias in opinions that favor government policies. While anonymity was

assured during this research, the responses from those who might have currently worked

for the government might have differed from the responses that might otherwise have

been reported by non-governmental employees under the same circumstances.

The demographical requirements of the study made obtaining participants who

met the inclusion criteria a limitation. The age group composed of 18-34 year olds makes

up the largest combined segment in the military; however, prospective participants from a

broad spectrum of this age group remained elusive, as actual participation data were not a

reflective sampling of the number of members in the U.S. Armed Forces.

Other limitations included the design of the instrument. The instrument’s design

made performing statistical calculations on the data gathered challenging, as the areas

measured could not effectively be linked to each other. This limited the ability to delve

more deeply into the data to detect subtle relationships in and amongst the demographics.

Efforts as mitigating participant anxiety and increasing response rates through placement

of additional response choices did not prevent a significant number of skipped questions

and participant elopements. Lastly, the uneven distribution in the reported ages of the

participants, with a significantly large number of 34 year olds participating, indicated

possible participation by those older than 34 years of age in the study who simply made a

selection closest to their actual age. While these limitations did impact the results, they

could be easily overcome through application of some modifications to both the

instrument and the procedure.

Recommendations

Consideration of the influence of religiosity on enhanced interrogation policy is

recommended. As this study revealed, the majority of participants in this study agree that

critical information is obtained through the use of enhanced interrogation. The majority

also report their religious beliefs are what lie behind their whole approach to life. It is

recommended that all government organizations responsible for development of policy

related to enhanced interrogation consider the religious influences that might compete

with its lawful application by members of the U.S. Armed Forces. This will result in

greater compliance and prevent liberal-interpretation of enhanced interrogation policy,

the absence of which has led to prisoner abuses in the past.

Recommendations for Future Research

This research was conducted using a convenience sample for a period of 30 days

with limited resources from a narrow segment of society. While this study was not

confined by geography it did not have a broad advertising campaign or the support of the

U.S. government that could have otherwise yielded a greater response rate. Therefore, it

is recommended that future research expand beyond these constraints in both scope and

duration. This expansion could provide broader evidence of the relationship between age,

gender, and religiosity with enhanced interrogation support and increase the

generalizability of the data and conclusions to the public at large.

Also recommended is administration of a stand-alone study to each branch of

military service. This may better determine unique differences in culture and opinions of

those services for their similarities and differences when collectively analyzed throughout

the entire organization.

While this study adhered to questions taken from previously validated instrument,

it is recommended that future research questions be designed to make a more direct link

between religiosity and enhanced interrogation within the context of the question and not

through different questions as done in this study. Lastly, qualitative research into familial

religious tradition with parallel military service and how each family member’s opinion

about the use of enhanced interrogation techniques may vary based on age, gender,

religiosity and branch of military service is recommended.

Implications for Social Change

The results of this study may affect social change by providing researchers,

religious and political leaders, and educators with a new perspective on religiosity and the

use of enhanced interrogation that has not fully been established in the current research.

As the findings of this study suggest, there is evidence to support a correlation between

the use of enhanced interrogation and religiosity. The value of this information is not

only in identifying its existence but in the ability to generalize it across the largest and

most impacted segment of the U.S. Armed Forces, the members that are 18-34 year of

age. Recognizing this influence will create positive social change through encouraging

consideration of this early in the policy development process to help ensure enhanced

interrogation policy is legal, moral, and ethical. The Military Leadership Diversity

Commission discovered that among the youngest member of the military there are a

greater number of nonreligious members serving than ever before (Military Leadership

Diversity Commission, 2010). They also found that this mirrors the United States

civilian population providing further evidence to support the administration’s goal of a

military that is reflective of the people it serves. Furthermore, this study validated the

findings of the American Red Cross survey concerning majority support for enhance

interrogation of terrorist and terrorist suspects by 18-34 year olds in the civilian

population.

The application of this research to a military population with due consideration of

religiosity is an innovative development that will shape the direction of future military

interrogation training policy. Evidence of the need to consider this continues to emerge

on a global scale as both state and non-state entities cite religion as the impetus for global

violence (Barnett, Bob, Onar, Jenichen, Leigh, & Leustean, 2015). Therefore, it is

imperative that the United States military lead the way through morally just enhanced

interrogation policy.

Conclusion

As the impetus for this study, the failure to consider religiosity was noted upon

review of the U.S. Public Opinion on Torture, 2001 – 2009 study by Gronke et al., (2010)

where the opinions were expressed without any reference to the significance of religion

on support for enhanced interrogation. In 2009, President Barrack Obama assigned the

Military Leadership Diversity Commission (MLDC) to explore religious diversity in the

United States Military to ensure the military diversity parallels the U.S. civilian

population (Military Leadership Diversity Commission, 2010). The establishment of this

commission demonstrates the administrations affirmation of the importance of religiosity

and its impact on the military to include training policies for enlisted and officers on the

laws of war and prisoner interrogations. In addition, print media commentary reports a

continued lack of diversity in some branches of the military stems from selective

recruitment of members from families with a tradition of conservative religious values

and military service (Downs & Murtazashvili, 2012). However, Malka & Soto (2011)

found religion to have both negative and positive effects on support for torture in that,

“some highly religious individuals support the use of torture on terrorism suspects,

whereas other, equally religious individuals oppose it” (Malka & Soto, 2011, p. 1198).

The key finding of the study was the statistically significant relationship between

religiosity and support for the use of enhanced interrogation on terrorist and suspected

terrorists by current or former U.S. Armed Forces personnel, a result that is reflective of

the sentiment of the U.S. population reported in the literature. This has been tracked and

reported by the PEW Research Center research which shows an increase in support from

43% in July 2004 to 53% in August 2011 (PEW, 2011). However, the reported decrease

in religiosity of individuals in the age cohort (18-34 years old) focused on in this study

continues to expand. According to PEW Forum report Nones’ on the rise, the number of

Millennial generation (born between 1981-1996) who increasingly refuse to identify with

a religious group (called ‘unaffiliated’ by PEW) continues to grow from the 15.3% in

2007 to 19.6% in 2012 (PEW, 2012). In the same PEW Forum report, this trend is

labeled as a change in religious behaviors and does not represent a change in religious

beliefs or practices (PEW, 2012). These PEW Forum conclusions are consistent with the

data collected for this study which showed a high level of religiosity as evidenced by the

number of positive responses indicating participants experience the divine and base their

approach to life on their religious beliefs.

The literature reviewed for this study support the ever increasing movement

towards consideration of moral and religious values, with or without an affiliation to a

traditional religious organization, along with recognition of a movement towards aligning

these values with significant social policy. Among this literature, some studies have

identified a link between religiosity and enlistment in the military. However, it was

limited to those without college experience who identify as ‘highly religious

evangelicals’ in early childhood. These isolates were not specified in the data collected

due to the identified limitations of the instrument used. Despite the limitations of the

study, the results of this studying indicate the views and opinions of current and former

U.S. Armed Forces personnel as a microcosm of the U.S. concerning support for

enhanced interrogation of terrorist and terrorist suspects run parallel to those who of the

same age cohort who have not served in the military.

This quantitative research study advanced the finding on the relationship between

religiosity, the military, and the use of enhanced interrogations. What this finding

signifies is the unique tradition upon which the United States was founded, that remains

firmly engrained, is that this is a country of both exceptional ideologies and

contradictions. While this study specifically examined enhanced interrogations as an

issue of moral concern, the United States remains uniquely apart from the rest of the word

concerning moral justification and the circumstantial application of it. This situation has

been cited in the literature as arising from the tradition of American exceptionalism.

This exceptionalism is said to be a modern manifestation of the moral codes and

Puritanical ideology brought to this land by the Pilgrims in 1620. These moral codes are

said to originate from within this individual and are not the result of an external force or

agent acting upon the individual. This has become known as “protestant sectarianism,”

and is considered the core individual influence on the national cultural community of the

United States and an influence which was reflected in the results of this study (Lipset,

1997, p. 19). American exceptionalism, as it relates to this study, may explain why the

United States paradoxically is one of the most religious nations in the world that express

overwhelming support for international humanitarian laws against torture while

simultaneously claiming exemption from certain aspects of it (Lipset, 1997;

Ignatieff, 2009).

The findings of this study validate the premise that these higher levels of

religiosity found in U.S. Armed Forces personnel will align with the intensely American

nationalistic self-perceptions and attitudes held by the public at large as religiosity has

steadily increased across the U.S. from 40.9 % in 2008 to 41.4% in 2013 (Newport,

2013). The results also indicate a correlation in composition and beliefs between the

participants and the general population concerning enhanced interrogations despite a

perceived declined in religious influence as a result of “demographic change and/or

cultural assimilation” to the WASP core (Kaufmann, 2004). While not specifically teased

out of the protestant majority from the survey results, yet they are the largest number of

them in the world reside in the United States, Protest Evangelicals may be the

representative majority of who participated in the survey as they have demonstrated more

willingness, even desirous, of asserting their core American identity and overt support for

national security policy (Eskridge, 2012).

A majority of the participants indicated enhanced interrogation can be justified,

has obtained critical information, is acceptable under certain circumstances, but is never

acceptable for use on United States Armed Forces personnel. While this study measured

the level of support for enhanced interrogation across a 5-spectrums (Appendix D),

support for the circumstantial use of enhanced interrogation stood at 51.4% (n = 105).

This corresponds with the with circumstantial support measure of 53% reported by the

PEW Research Center and the 50% from Associated Press Center for Public Affairs

Research group (PEW, 2011; AP-NORC, 2013).

Since political party preference was not a measure of this survey, no direct

relationship can be established to any one particular political party. However, responses

to this study were predominantly from 34 year old white males who strongly self-identify

with ‘Judeo-Christian’ traditional values. This correlates to the core “common western

religious outlook” that defines the basic or typical/modal American patriot/nationalist and

is a classic feature common to the Republican Party (Silk, 1984, p. 65).

Historically, these core features have been associated with the White AngloSaxon

Protestants (WASP) who maintained social and political dominance for most of the 20th

century. During most of the 20th century, military service had traditionally been an

institutional tool used to assimilate poor American youth and minorities into the core of

traditional American values associated with the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant

establishment. As a result, there has been a shift in national political party affiliation,

most notably in the South, with states embracing the Republican party core after decades

of democratic momentum on civil rights from 1954-1968 (Jones, 2014). This

sociopolitical shift has implications for the all-volunteer military force as well. This is

significant since the military is recognized as both a focal point for American nationalism

and route for social mobility and economic stability for many young Americans, a

majority of which come from the Southern United States (Bender, Kiersz, and Rosen,

2014).

The sociopolitical influence of an all-voluntary force when compared with the

historical example of compulsory service provides further evidence of the influence this

religious shift has on national security policy. Mandatory military service was eliminated

in 1973 due to the growing size of the eligible population, increasing costs in maintaining

the military, as well as moral and economic arguments raised during the height of the

democratically led civil rights movement (Rostker, 2006). Since then, there has been a

shift in the military toward incentives, benefits, and opportunities that will allow

volunteers to improve their lot in life as an impetus to join. These benefits are

substantive for those who are eligible and take advantage of the opportunity (e.g. college

tuition, vocational training, healthcare, travel, retirement, etc.). As a result, volunteers are

then more likely to reciprocate through self-identification with the U.S. political system

and its policies. Furthermore, there may be personal, professional, or cultural pressure not

to think negatively of the U.S. national security policies that are the reason why the U.S.

military exists in modern times. Evidence of this shift was revealed in this study and the

literature. From 2004-2013, the makeup of the all-voluntary military force is increasingly

religious, educated (with more than 92% of the new accessions being high school

graduates), and the majority self-identify with the Republican Party (Office of the Deputy

Assistant Secretary of Defense, 2014).

Those who are not intellectually, socially, or emotionally prepared may have

avoided all or part of the survey. Even despite protections and assurance conveyed in the

informed consent, because the issue generates uncomfortable psychological conflicts that

he or she would rather just avoid, especially since there is no tangible benefit from

completing the survey. Beginning with the section of the survey concerning religiosity

eight participants dropped out. Of those remaining who completed the survey, 71%

indicated religion was an important part of their lives with 59.7% indicating their religion

influences the decisions they make in everyday life. This corresponds with the results of

the Duke University sub-categorical finding of 67.3% (n = 306) from the Duke University

Religion Index (DUREL) of a normalized population from between 18-90 years of age.

Statistical analysis of the data indicated strong statistical support for enhanced

interrogation by this population but did not correlate this support with religiosity, age, or

gender. While the majority of respondents were Christians, those who represent the

threat most closely associated with the use of enhanced interrogation are not white nor are

they Christian. This may be why it is easier for military members to adopt the traditional

White Angelo-Saxon Protestant core philosophy and policies in support of American

nationalism and in parallel with other preexisting religious beliefs they may hold to

address the threat. Other implications of this research include consideration of those

whose race and ethnicity are of African, Hispanic, Asian, or other backgrounds that may

not assimilate into traditional core of support for the output of the US policy process. This

may account for the variances in selection choices and the number of dropouts from the

study, despite being a demographic group that is aggressively targeted for service in the

military.

The impact on the views and attitudes of military service members through the

socialization process is significant and begins with a formal, authoritarian, and structured

indoctrination designed to eliminate individuality and build honor, courage, and

commitment to the military team by pushing the recruit to their physical and mental

limits. This is followed by their acceptance into the core group as a member of the team

where adult-era friendship are made, they develop autonomous identities, and are given

greater levels of initial responsibility then is the case in similar civilian occupations

which results in their becoming loyal to the institution. This institutional loyalty shapes

perceptions and judgments concerning policies in appreciation of the positive things the

institution has done for them while serving as state agents engaged in protecting the

national security of the United States which for some may include the threat and

application of physical coercion against those who want to do harm to the U.S. and its

citizens (Pohl, 2004). During an interview with former President Bill Clinton concerning

enhanced interrogation policy in the United States, President Clinton stated:

What I hope will happen is that we will, you know, keep pushing on this, find out

exactly what happened, give anybody who disagrees the chance to have their say,

and then do what we should always do in cases like this, say what our policies going

to be and stick with it and have it consistent with international law. (Fusion,

December 11, 2014 8:07 PM).

Adherence to enhanced interrogation policy and international law remains the

focus of both current and past political leaders. Therefore, ensuring United States Armed

Forces personnel are appropriately trained when acting as proxies of the state is of

paramount importance. The Chaplain Corps can be instrumental in this effort by

understanding and educating leadership and new enlistees as to how important religious

beliefs and practices are to military members of all ages. Integrated training at all levels

on ethical obligations and due consideration for the influence of all religions, politics

ideologies, and adherence to military law is one recommended.

The conclusions drawn from this study indicate that support for the use of

enhanced interrogation is strong and religiosity as a factor that influences support of

enhanced interrogation was not sufficiently measured. Despite the limitations of this

research, both religiosity and enhanced interrogation remain highly visible and important

policy issues for both the military and the United States government. Expansion of this

study is needed to further understand this sociocultural phenomenon as it applies to U.S

Armed Forces personnel.

Religiosity and Support for the use of Enhanced Interrogation

Students also viewed