Table 2.

Coding scheme based on Blasi (1983), Bandura (1999) and De Graaff et al. (2016a)

Construct	Markers/typical manifestations of the constructs in the interviews
Moral identity	Integrates the significance and salience of morality and values in an individual’s considerations (moral self). States feeling highly responsible or accountable in a specific situation for the consequences of actions (accountability). States having (no) moral obligation to act (high or low sense of moral worth). Refers to the reflection on integration of values in personal actions (self-consistency).
Moral disengagement	Makes reconstructions of own behavior or the incident itself. By: - justifying what happens, for example by saying that the goals justify the means - comparing the incident or own behavior with other situations that are considered worse, for example by saying that torture is permitted since the victim killed innocent children - using language that masks what happens, for example discussing collateral damage
	Makes reconstructions of own role in the incident. By: - stating not to be held responsible for what happened, for example by saying someone else gave an order - stating it is unclear who is responsible in the situation, for example by saying there were others present as well who could have intervened
	Makes reconstructions of the parties involved in the situation. By: - using language that dehumanizes individuals or groups of people, for example by referring to them as dogs instead of people - stating the victim has to blame himself for getting into this situation, for example by saying they started the terrorizing first.
Moral dilemmas	Refers to situations, at all levels of complexity and tragedy, in which required to make a decision when binding (personal) moral principles contradict. That is, perceived moral dilemmas that are cultural related, work related (such as regarding the mission or the unit) or personal (such as related to home front).