Commentary on the Special Issue on Moral Injury: Leveraging Existing Constructs to Test the Heuristic Model of Moral Injury

Abstract

The literature on moral injury (MI) is currently undermined by the lack of clear boundaries regarding the construct and a dearth of research on the processes by which potentially morally injurious events lead to MI. The heuristic continuum model of moral stressors proposes ways of distinguishing between moral frustrations, moral distress, and MI. In this commentary, we highlight five testable principles that can be derived from the heuristic model and evaluated using well-established constructs. Specifically, we describe meaningful distinctions between guilt and shame and address how these moral emotions can be used to distinguish between moral distress and MI. We also describe the potential role of event-related rumination, shame proneness, and cognitive flexibility in the development of MI following exposure to potentially morally injurious events. We believe that these principles offer critical next steps for the advancement of the MI field and illustrate how MI research can be generalized beyond the military context.