Editing Debriefing (section)

==Types ==
===Military===
[[File:G for George crew debriefing 27 Nov 1943 AWM 069823.jpg|alt=|thumb|359x359px|Female intelligence officer at the Royal Air Force Station receiving a report from members of the crew of G George, [[Avro Lancaster]] of 460 Squadron RAAF, after an attack on Berlin, 26 November 1943.]]
Throughout the existence of combat and the history of war, engaging with the emotional and psychological impact on soldiers has been an ongoing and conflicting conversation. Debriefings in the [[military]] originated for three purposes: to mitigate the psychological impact of traumatic events, alleviate acute stress response, and reduce the frequency of [[Posttraumatic stress disorder|post-traumatic stress disorder]], also known as PTSD.<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last1=Adler|first1=Amy B.|last2=Castro|first2=Carl Andrew|last3=McGurk|first3=Dennis|date=January 2009|title=Time-Driven Battlemind Psychological Debriefing: A Group-Level Early Intervention in Combat|journal=Military Medicine|language=en|volume=174|issue=1|pages=021–028|doi=10.7205/MILMED-D-00-2208|pmid=19216294|issn=0026-4075|doi-access=free}}</ref> Though there are several types of debriefing strategies, the following three are frequently used within military groups:

# Historical group debriefing – refers to the process of collecting historical patterns of trauma through the use of group therapy.<ref name=":1" /> This process happens with soldiers recounting combat events in chronological order and adding their own reactions of thoughts and feelings. The key objective of this strategy is to allow men to "talk it out" in a way that they are not commonly socialized to do so. Though this group therapy process does not aim to reduce stress, it has resulted in providing a feeling of relief and connection amongst the soldiers.
# [[Critical incident stress debriefing]] (CISD) – a form of psychological debriefing that features a specific structure and format, which were developed to address critical incident stress experienced by emergency service workers.<ref name=":2">{{Cite book|last1=Raphael|first1=Beverley|title=Psychological Debriefing: Theory, Practice and Evidence|last2=Wilson|first2=John|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2000|isbn=978-0-521-64700-7|location=Cambridge|page=2|language=en}}</ref> It was developed by Jeffrey Mitchell and is considered the most widely used today.<ref name=":2" /> It operates using the following three components: pre-incident functions, on-scene support services, and post-incident interventions.<ref name=":1" /> ''Pre-incident functions'' refers to the education and coping mechanisms taught to those who are more vulnerable to traumatization before they enter combat. ''On-scene support services'' entails brief discussions and unstructured therapy sessions that occur within a few hours of an incident that may cause high stress responses in soldiers. Finally, ''post-incident interventions'' occur usually at least 24 hours after an incident to give the soldiers a bit more time to deescalate from a having high stress response to that incident. The process is peer-driven but backed-up by a group of professional counselors.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Thurmond|first=Strom|title=The Practices and Procedures of the Investigating Services of the Department of Defense and the Military Departments Concerning the Investigations Into the Deaths of Military Personnel Which May Have Resulted from Self-Inflicted Causes|publisher=DIANE Publishing|year=1998|isbn=978-0-7881-4236-9|location=Washington, D.C.|page=148|language=en}}</ref>
# Process debriefing – it is similar to the other debriefing strategies in that it focuses on the group narrative; however, it differs because it prioritizes the leadership and effectiveness of the facilitators who lead the debriefing sessions. These facilitators are provided with professional development on how to plan for and lead the group sessions. In cases of deception-based experiences where the participant was manipulated or provided with false information, the process include a discussion with the participant how the deception might have temporarily altered or influenced his self-perceptions.<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Crano|first1=William D.|title=Principles and Methods of Social Research, Third Edition|last2=Brewer|first2=Marilynn B.|last3=Lac|first3=Andrew|publisher=Routledge|year=2014|isbn=978-1-317-66607-3|location=New York|page=432|language=en}}</ref>

All of these debriefing strategies maximize on the collective experience of soldiers, rather than on the individual.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=MacDonald|first=Catherine M.|date=2003-12-01|title=Evaluation of Stress Debriefing Interventions with Military Populations|url=https://academic.oup.com/milmed/article/168/12/961/4820090|journal=Military Medicine|language=en|volume=168|issue=12|pages=961–968|doi=10.1093/milmed/168.12.961|pmid=14719618|issn=0026-4075|doi-access=free|url-access=subscription}}</ref> There is a growing belief that allowing soldiers to reflect and problem-solve as a group builds their relationship with each other over time and ultimately, their effectiveness as a unit. It also provides them with an outlet rather than forcing them to become consumed by their thoughts.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://usamrd-w.amedd.army.mil/assets/docs/publications/adler_et_al_2007_report_2007-001_battlemind_procedures.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161019032137/http://usamrd-w.amedd.army.mil/assets/docs/publications/adler_et_al_2007_report_2007-001_battlemind_procedures.pdf|archive-date=October 19, 2016|title=Battlemind Psychological Debriefings|last=Adler|first=Dr. Amy|date=April 2, 2007}}</ref> Typically, the role of a soldier is seen as a job and a courageous duty, which does not give value to the psychological and emotional need of reflection. Conclusively, in order to make the role of a soldier more sustainable, captains and group leaders must prioritize debriefing strategies to focus more on the whole person.

===Experiential learning ===
Ernesto Yturralde, experiential trainer and researcher, explains: "In the field of [[experiential learning]] methodology, the debriefing is a semi-structured process by which the facilitator, once a certain activity is accomplished, makes a series of progressive questions in this session, with an adequate sequence that let the participants reflect what happened, giving important insights with the aim of that project towards the future, linking the challenge with the actions and the future."<ref>"Yturralde's Debriefing Model of the 4 Elements: Water, Air, Earth and Fire", Association for Challenge Course
Technology 22nd Conference at Boston, Massachusetts, on February 2012 and presented at the Association for Experiential Education International Conference at Colombia in June 2012. Yturralde, Ernesto. "Andragogía…¿ Qué es la Andragogía." ''Recuperado el'' 2009;20.</ref> It is analogous to "providing feedback" as it constitutes a vital component of any simulation intervention or any educational intervention, involving a process of explanation, [[analysis]], and synthesis, with an active facilitator-participant interface.<ref>{{Cite book |title=Quality of Anesthesia Care, An Issue of Anesthesiology Clinics |last1=Neuman|first1=Mark|last2=Martinez|first2=Elizabeth|publisher=W.B. Saunders Company|year=2011|isbn=978-1-4557-0419-4|location=Philadelphia, PA|page=17}}</ref>

"Emotional Decompression" is one style of psychological debriefing proposed by David Kinchin in his 2007 book by that name.<ref>{{cite book | last=Kinchin | first=David | title=A Guide to Psychological Debriefing: Managing Emotional Decompression and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder | publisher=Jessica Kingsley Publishers | year=2007 | isbn=978-1-84642-661-2 | oclc=175298673 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yhmAvMMsKgkC}}</ref>

Experiential learning debriefing is the basis for debriefing in [[Medical Simulation]], used widely within healthcare.<ref name=Fanning2007>{{cite journal | last1=Fanning | first1=Ruth M. | last2=Gaba | first2=David M. | title=The Role of Debriefing in Simulation-Based Learning | journal=Simulation in Healthcare: The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare | publisher=Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) | volume=2 | issue=2 | year=2007 | issn=1559-2332 | doi=10.1097/sih.0b013e3180315539 | pages=115–125| pmid=19088616 | s2cid=18613707 }}</ref>

===Crisis intervention===
{{See also|Posttraumatic_stress_disorder#Psychological_debriefing|label 1 = Psychological debriefing}}
Trauma-exposed individuals often receive treatment called ''psychological debriefing'' in an effort to prevent PTSD, which consists of interviews that are meant to allow individuals to directly confront the event and share their feelings with the counselor and to help structure their memories of the event.<ref name=AHRQ2013/>

However, several [[Meta-analysis|meta-analyses]] find that psychological debriefing is unhelpful and is potentially harmful.<ref name="AHRQ2013">{{cite book|last1=Gartlehner|first1=Gerald|last2=Forneris|first2=Catherine A.|last3=Brownley|first3=Kimberly A.|last4=Gaynes|first4=Bradley N.|last5=Sonis|first5=Jeffrey|last6=Coker-Schwimmer|first6=Emmanuel|last7=Jonas|first7=Daniel E.|last8=Greenblatt|first8=Amy|last9=Wilkins|first9=Tania M.|last10=Woodell|first10=Carol L.|last11=Lohr|first11=Kathleen N.|title=Interventions for the Prevention of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in Adults After Exposure to Psychological Trauma|chapter=Discussion |date=2013|publisher=Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US)|url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK133347/|language=en|pmid=23658936}}</ref><ref name="Feldner2007">{{cite journal |vauthors=Feldner MT, Monson CM, Friedman MJ |title=A critical analysis of approaches to targeted PTSD prevention: current status and theoretically derived future directions |journal=Behav Modif |volume=31 |issue=1 |pages=80–116 |year=2007 |pmid=17179532 |doi=10.1177/0145445506295057|citeseerx=10.1.1.595.9186 |s2cid=44619491 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Rose|first1=S|last2=Bisson|first2=J|last3=Churchill|first3=R|last4=Wessely|first4=S|title=Psychological debriefing for preventing post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).|journal=The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews|date=2002|issue=2|article-number=CD000560|doi=10.1002/14651858.CD000560|pmid=12076399|pmc=7032695}}</ref> A 2019 Cochrane [[Systematic review|Systematic Review]] found low-quality evidence suggesting potential benefit for some people, however, the studies performed had a high degree of uncertainty due to bias and the evidence is not strong enough to recommend multiple sessions of early psychological interventions for all people who are exposed to trauma.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Roberts|first1=Neil P.|last2=Kitchiner|first2=Neil J.|last3=Kenardy|first3=Justin|last4=Robertson|first4=Lindsay|last5=Lewis|first5=Catrin|last6=Bisson|first6=Jonathan I.|date=2019|title=Multiple session early psychological interventions for the prevention of post-traumatic stress disorder|journal=The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews|volume=2019|issue=8 |article-number=CD006869|doi=10.1002/14651858.CD006869.pub3|issn=1469-493X|pmc=6699654|pmid=31425615}}</ref> As of 2017 The [[American Psychological Association]] assessed psychological debriefing as ''No Research Support/Treatment is Potentially Harmful''.<ref>{{cite web|title=Psychological Debriefing for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder|url=https://www.div12.org/psychological-treatments/treatments/psychological-debriefing-for-post-traumatic-stress-disorder/|website=www.div12.org|date=19 August 2014 |publisher=Society of Clinical Psychology: Division 12 of The American Psychological Association|access-date=9 September 2017}}</ref>

Critical incident stress debriefing is a [[crisis intervention]] program that is used to provide initial psychosocial relief to rescue workers. It is generally conducted in a group session and held between 24 and 72 hours of the disaster. Each debriefing session follows seven phases:

# Introduction to set rules
# Fact phase to establish what happened
# Cognition phase to discuss thoughts about what happened
# Reaction phase to discuss emotions associated with what happened
# Symptoms phase to learn the signs and symptoms of distress
# Educational phase to learn about post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and coping strategies
# Re-entry phase to discuss any other issues and to provide any additional services.<ref name="Carlier et al., 1998">{{cite journal | last1=Carlier | first1=Ingrid V. E. | last2=Lamberts | first2=Regina D. | last3=Van Uchelen | first3=Annephine J. | last4=Gersons | first4=Berthold P. R. | title=Disaster-related post-traumatic stress in police officers: a field study of the impact of debriefing | journal=Stress Medicine | publisher=Wiley | volume=14 | issue=3 | year=1998 | issn=0748-8386 | doi=10.1002/(sici)1099-1700(199807)14:3<143::aid-smi770>3.0.co;2-s | pages=143–148}}</ref>

The goal of this type of debriefing is to stop the individuals from developing PTSD. Although this debriefing is widely used, there is uncertainty how it affects an individual. Researchers Mayou, Ehlers and Hobbs in 2000 were interested in evaluating the 3-year results of a [[randomized controlled trial]] of debriefing for consecutive subjects admitted to the hospital following a traffic accident. The patients were assessed in the hospital using the Impact of Event Scale (IES), Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) and a questionnaire, and were then reassessed at 3 years and 3 months. The intervention used was psychological debriefing. The results showed that the intervention group had significantly worse psychiatric symptoms, travel anxiety, physical problems, and financial problems.<ref>{{cite journal | last1=Mayou | first1=R. A. | last2=Ehlers | first2=A. | last3=Hobbs | first3=M. | title=Psychological debriefing for road traffic accident victims | journal=British Journal of Psychiatry | publisher=Royal College of Psychiatrists | volume=176 | issue=6 | year=2000 | issn=0007-1250 | doi=10.1192/bjp.176.6.589 | doi-access=free | pages=589–593| pmid=10974967 }}</ref>

In an earlier study conducted by Carlier et al. in 1998, they looked at the symptomatology in police officers that had been debriefed and not debriefed following a civilian plane crash. The results showed that the two groups did not differ in pre-event or post event distress. Furthermore, those who had undergone debriefing had significantly more disaster-related hyper arousal symptoms.<ref name="Carlier et al., 1998"/>

Overall, these results showed that caution should be used when using Critical Incident Stress Debriefing. Studies have shown that it is ineffective and has adverse long-term effects, and is not an appropriate treatment for trauma victims.

===Psychological research===
In [[psychology|psychological research]], a debriefing is a short interview that takes place between researchers and research participants immediately following their participation in a [[Experimental psychology|psychology experiment]]. The debriefing is an important ethical consideration to make sure that participants are fully informed about, and not psychologically or physically harmed in any way by, their experience in an experiment. Along with [[informed consent]], the debriefing is considered to be a fundamental ethical precaution in research involving human beings.<ref>[https://www.bps.org.uk/sites/beta.bps.org.uk/files/Policy%20-%20Files/Code%20of%20Ethics%20and%20Conduct%20(2009).pdf Code of Ethics and Conduct, 3.4, 20 from the British Psychological Society] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180307214417/https://www.bps.org.uk/sites/beta.bps.org.uk/files/Policy%20-%20Files/Code%20of%20Ethics%20and%20Conduct%20(2009).pdf |date=2018-03-07 }} Retrieved March 7, 2018.</ref> It is especially important in [[social psychology (psychology)|social psychology]] experiments that use deception. Debriefing is typically not used in surveys, observational studies, or other forms of research that involve no deception and minimal risk to participants.

Methodological advantages of a debriefing include "the ability of researchers to check the effectiveness of a manipulation, or to identify participants who were able to guess the hypothesis or spot a deception."<ref>{{Cite book|last=Husain|first=Akbar|title=Social Psychology|publisher=Pearson Education|year=2012|isbn=978-81-317-6000-0|location=Delhi|page=71}}</ref> If the data have been compromised in this way, then those participants should be excluded from the analysis. Many psychologists feel that these benefits justify a post-experimental follow-up even in the absence of deception or stressful procedures.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Aronson |first1=E. |last2=Wilson |first2=T. D. |last3=Brewer |first3=M. B. |year=1998 |chapter=Experimentation in social psychology |editor1=D. T. Gilbert |editor2=S. T. Fiske |editor3=G. Lindzey |title=The handbook of social psychology |place=New York, NY |publisher=McGraw Hill }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bps.org.uk/downloadfile.cfm?file_uuid=1B299392-7E96-C67F-D4A092C173979F33&ext=pdf |format=pdf |author=Professional Practice Board Working Party |title=Psychological Debriefing |date=May 2002 |publisher=British Psychological Society |access-date=December 8, 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070927220523/http://www.bps.org.uk/downloadfile.cfm?file_uuid=1B299392-7E96-C67F-D4A092C173979F33&ext=pdf |archive-date=2007-09-27}}</ref>

=== Organizational ===
Debriefing in the business discipline is largely instrumental to [[project management]], particularly in "accelerating projects, innovating novel approaches, and hitting difficult objectives".<ref name="Sundheim">{{Cite news|last=Sundheim|first=Doug|url=https://hbr.org/2015/07/debriefing-a-simple-tool-to-help-your-team-tackle-tough-problems|title=Debriefing: A Simple Tool to Help Your Team Tackle Tough Problems|date=2015-07-02|work=Harvard Business Review|access-date=2020-04-19|issn=0017-8012}}</ref> Debriefs are considered to primarily serve developmental purposes rather than evaluative or judgmental. They are also considered to have more of a developmental intent than an administrative intent, such as in a [[performance appraisal]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Tannenbaum|first1=Scott I.|last2=Cerasoli|first2=Christopher P.|date=2013-02-01|title=Do Team and Individual Debriefs Enhance Performance? A Meta-Analysis|journal=Human Factors|language=en|volume=55|issue=1|pages=231–245|doi=10.1177/0018720812448394|pmid=23516804|s2cid=22260709|issn=0018-7208}}</ref> One difference in organizational and/or project management is that the debriefing process is not only conducted after the conclusion of other events, but can also be conducted in real-time to continuously evolve plans during execution. The main reason for focusing on debriefing in an organizational or even in a project management capacity, is to increase effectiveness of the team, both individually and collectively. One study found that properly conducted debriefings can help organizations realize individual and team performance improvements by about 20-25%.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Tannenbaum|first1=Scott I.|last2=Cerasoli|first2=Christopher P.|date=February 2013|title=Do team and individual debriefs enhance performance? A meta-analysis|journal=Human Factors|volume=55|issue=1|pages=231–245|doi=10.1177/0018720812448394|issn=0018-7208|pmid=23516804|s2cid=22260709}}</ref>

On the conclusion of a [[Invitation to tender|tendering exercise]] for a business contract, both successful and unsuccessful tenderers may be offered a debriefing meeting.<ref>[[State Government of Victoria]], [https://www.buyingfor.vic.gov.au/debrief-tender-participants-construction-guidance-81 Debrief for tender participants (Construction Guidance 8.1)], updated on 3 July 2023, accessed on 31 March 2025</ref>

==== Techniques ====
Fundamentally, key questions to consider during a debriefing session are:<ref name="Sundheim"/>

* What were we trying to accomplish?
* Where did we hit (or miss) our objectives?
* What caused our results?
* What should we start, stop, or continue doing?

Often, structuring debriefings by following a plan or outline visiting the main functions of the debriefing process are considered more efficient. Most debriefings require at least some planning and organization prior to assembly of the team.

==== Technology ====
Digital tools have emerged aiming to [[automate]] the preparation of a debriefing session, based on the anonymous answers to questions asked of individual team members. This information can then be used to generate a discussion guide for the person in charge of the debrief to guide that particular session.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Reyes|first1=Denise L.|last2=Tannenbaum|first2=Scott I.|last3=Salas|first3=Eduardo|date=2018-03-22|title=Team Development: The Power of Debriefing|url=https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?p=AONE&sw=w&issn=19464606&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA535943010&sid=googleScholar&linkaccess=abs|journal=People & Strategy|language=en|volume=41|issue=2|pages=46–52}}</ref> There is also an emergent debriefing model called "digital debriefing", which involves video-facilitated instructor debriefing.<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Konstantinidis|first1=Stathis Th|title=Digital Innovations in Healthcare Education and Training|last2=Bamidis|first2=Panagiotis D.|last3=Zary|first3=Nabil|publisher=Academic Press|year=2020|isbn=978-0-12-813144-2|location=London|page=24}}</ref> Due to the technologies used, this type of debriefing can be conducted remotely.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Chiniara|first=Gilles|title=Clinical Simulation: Education, Operations and Engineering, Second Edition|publisher=Academic Press|year=2019|isbn=978-0-12-815657-5|location=London|page=28}}</ref>