Table 3. Wingman-Connect Impact on Targeted Class-Individual Risk and Protective Factors in Technical Traininga.
| Measure | Score, Mean (SD) | ES (95% CI) | RC (95% CI) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wingman-Connect | Stress management | |||||
| Baseline | 1 mo | Baseline | 1 mo | |||
| Class characteristics | ||||||
| Class cohesionb | 3.12 (0.59) | 3.16 (0.72) | 3.09 (0.58) | 3.05 (0.75) | 0.18 (0.04 to 0.29)c | −0.10 (−0.35 to 0.11) |
| Class moraleb | 3.78 (0.91) | 3.79 (0.96) | 3.68 (0.90) | 3.63 (1.00) | 0.23 (0.05 to 0.40)c | 0.03 (−0.13 to 0.17) |
| Healthy class normsb | 2.95 (0.55) | 3.10 (0.63) | 2.90 (0.57) | 3.01 (0.62) | 0.18 (0.04 to 0.30)c | −0.22 (−0.53 to 0.04) |
| Bonds to classmatesb | 2.31 (1.65) | 2.08 (1.61) | 2.07 (1.62) | 1.83 (1.56) | 0.21 (0.05 to 0.35)c | −0.03 (−0.11 to 0.04) |
| Individual characteristics | ||||||
| Healthy career behaviors | 1.72 (0.61) | 1.69 (0.75) | 1.70 (0.64) | 1.60 (0.72) | 0.16 (0.02 to 0.28)c | −0.11 (−0.32 to 0.08) |
| Help seeking acceptability | 3.10 (0.56) | 3.18 (0.62) | 3.12 (0.57) | 3.12 (0.61) | 0.12 (−0.01 to 0.23) | −0.06 (−0.30 to 0.16) |
| Maladaptive coping attitudesd | 1.61 (0.46) | 1.63 (.049) | 1.62 (0.47) | 1.64 (0.50) | 0.00 (−14 to 11) | 0.07 (−0.25 to 0.34) |
| Military functional impairmentd | ||||||
| Social | 0.62 (0.64) | 0.51 (0.68) | 0.57 (0.66) | 0.56 (0.70) | −0.10 (−0.26 to 0.04) | −0.23 (−0.49 to −0.02)c,e |
| Personal | 0.35 (0.57) | 0.34 (0.62) | 0.35 (0.58) | 0.40 (0.69) | −0.10 (−0.24 to 0.03) | −0.54 (−0.92 to −0.23)c,e |
| Lonelinessd | 1.80 (0.76) | 1.73 (0.77) | 1.73 (0.74) | 1.78 (0.73) | −0.10 (−0.26 to 0.05) | −0.03 (−0.19 to 0.11) |
| Anxietyd | 10.95 (13.86) | 9.91 (15.55) | 12.40 (15.94) | 11.55 (15.75) | −0.14 (−0.29 to −0.01)c | 0.10 (−0.14 to 0.31) |
| Angerd | 0.53 (0.66) | 0.43 (0.62) | 0.55 (0.65) | 0.51 (0.66) | −0.18 (−0.35 to −0.04)c | −0.31 (−0.67 to 0.00)c,e |
| Emotion regulation difficulties | 1.91 (0.62) | 1.92 (0.69) | 1.91 (0.61) | 1.95 (0.65) | −0.07 (−0.23 to 0.08) | 0.00 (−0.20 to 0.19) |
Abbreviations: ES, effect size; RC, relative change.
All models were adjusted for class (random effect), sex, age, race/ethnicity, and service component. RC refers to the training condition × baseline interaction and shows the Wingman-Connect vs stress management impact per 1 unit difference at baseline on that variable. ESs are main effects without baseline × training condition interaction in model.
Indicates that this measure loads on the Connected Thriving Class factor used in mediation analysis.
Indicates that ES and RC (95% CI) are significant (P < .05).
Higher scores on these measures indicate greater risk; therefore, negative regression estimates and ESs indicate beneficial impacts of Wingman-Connect.
For participants in the highest tercile of problems at baseline, Wingman-Connect was associated with significantly reduced social functional impairment (ES, −0.27; 95% CI, −0.51 to −0.08), personal functional impairment (ES, −0.30; 95% CI, −0.53 to −0.11), and anger (ES, −0.30; 95% CI, −0.57 to −0.09) vs stress management.