Testimony of Robert W. Swezey, Ph.D. American Psychological Association for the United States House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense The Honorable Jerry Lewis, Chairman Fiscal Year 2001 Appropriations for Department of Defense March 29, 2000

My name is Robert Swezey, Ph.D., and I am speaking here on behalf of the American Psychological Association (APA). APA is a professional and scientific organization of more than 159,000 members and associates, many of whom conduct behavioral research relevant to the military. I would like to address two main issues of relevance to this Subcommittee:

1. first, the dangerous trend within the Department of Defense (DoD) of cutting funds for its Science and Technology budget;

2. and second, the critical need to invest in psychological research in DoD's service laboratories, and the particular need to sustain support for human systems programs in the Air Force. Once again, the Administration's request would cut the Air Force's applied behavioral research budget for Fiscal Year 2001, despite Congressional action restoring funds to this budget last year.

 Dangerous Under-Investment in DoD Science and Technology

I know this Subcommittee shares the science community's strong concern about DoD's declining overall investment in science and technology. Our military superiority and success in recent hostilities can be traced to substantial funding for basic and applied research several decades ago, and our ability to maintain near-term and future global superiority depends on re-investing in science and technology now.

Our military faces a host of current challenges around the world, including renewed hostilities, the emergence of non-traditional conflict situations, new peace-keeping missions, increased operational tempo and longer deployments for military members, at the same time that forces face continuing recruitment and retention problems. In addition, the sophistication of weapons and information technology has dramatically changed the skills required of military personnel. What hasn't changed is that success in military operations still depends on people--at every level, in every unit. We simply cannot afford to let hardware and software get too far ahead of the "humanware." As the Secretary of the Air Force recently stated before this Subcommittee, training and education in particular are the essential keys to successful command and employment of military power when technology becomes more sophisticated and when the complexity and pace of operations increase.

Psychological research addresses the most critical mission issue facing our armed services -- maintaining readiness in an ever-changing national security climate -- by providing policy-relevant data on the selection and assignment of personnel, skills-training, design of the human-machine interface, and efficient and safe operation of complex systems. Unfortunately, behavioral research is at a particular disadvantage in the current decision-making atmosphere, which favors easily identifiable research "products," such as new hardware; the fact that behavioral research can determine whether personnel will be able to use that hardware is not obvious until something goes wrong.

[back to top]

 The Military Behavioral Science Programs

The military service laboratories provide a stable, mission-oriented focus for defense science and technology, conducting and sponsoring basic (6.1), applied/exploratory development (6.2) and advanced development (6.3) research. Especially at the 6.1 and 6.2 levels, research programs which are eliminated from the mission labs as cost-cutting measures are extremely unlikely to be picked up by industry, which focuses on short-term, profit-driven product development. Once the expertise is gone, there is absolutely no way to "catch up" when mission needs for critical human-oriented research develop.

Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI)

ARI works to build the ultimate smart weapon: the American soldier. ARI was established to conduct personnel and behavioral research on such topics as minority and general recruitment; personnel testing and evaluation; training and retraining. ARI is the focal point and principal source of expertise for all the military services in leadership research, an area critical to the success of the military. Research that helps our armed forces identify, nurture, and train leaders is critical to their success. ARI also investigates how particular aspects of Army culture and/or larger societal issues influence recruitment, retention, morale and performance.

Office of Naval Research (ONR)

The Cognitive and Neural Sciences Division (CNS) of ONR supports research to increase the understanding of complex cognitive skills in humans; aid in the development and improvement of machine vision; improve human factors engineering in new technologies; and advance the design of robotics systems. An example of CNS-supported research is the division's long-term investment in artificial intelligence research. This research has led to many useful products, including software that enables the use of "embedded training." Many of the Navy's operational tasks, such as recognizing and responding to threats, require complex interactions with sophisticated, computer-based systems. Embedded training allows shipboard personnel to develop and refine critical skills by practicing simulated exercises on their own workstations. Once developed, embedded training software can be loaded onto specified computer systems and delivered wherever and however it is needed.

 Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL)

APA is extremely concerned about the significant cuts anticipated for applied behavioral research (6.2) within AFRL, especially since Congress restored similar cuts to these research programs in Fiscal Year 2000 to ensure continuation of vital work. These programs are responsible for developing the products which flow from manpower, personnel, and training and crew technology research in the Air Force, products which are relevant to an enormous number of acknowledged Air Force mission needs ranging from weapons design, to improvements in simulator technology, to improving crew survivability in combat, to faster, more powerful and less expensive training regimens.

As a result of recent cuts to the AFRL behavioral research budget, for example, the world's premier organization devoted to personnel selection and classification (formerly housed at Brooks Air Force Base) no longer exists. This has a direct, negative impact on the Air Force's and other services' ability to efficiently identify and assign personnel (especially pilots). Similarly, reductions in support for applied research in human factors have resulted in an inability to fully enhance human factors modeling capabilities, which are essential for determining human-system requirements early in system concept development, when the most impact can be made in terms of manpower and cost savings.

In January of this year, the Air Force Association issued a special report, "Shortchanging the Future," in which retired Generals and scientists outlined the dangers of the declining Air Force science and technology budget (both in terms of real dollars and percentage of total Air Force spending). APA strongly supports the report's primary conclusion: at critical decision-making points within the Air Force today, near-term readiness and modernization concerns are not balanced with an investment in science and technology to meet the demands of future threats. As this Subcommittee has noted repeatedly this spring, this is indeed a critical mistake.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

It is sometimes easy to overlook the important contributions of behavioral research to the missions of the Army, Navy and Air Force because the results usually do not translate directly into new weapons systems or hardware. Yet behavioral research has provided and will continue to provide the foundation for tremendous savings through increased personnel efficiency and productivity. This work is vital to the military for identifying critically needed improvements in human resources development, training and human error reduction.

Increasing demands for qualified recruits place huge demands on the military to more efficiently target and train personnel; increasingly sophisticated weapons systems place more, not fewer, demands on human operators. We must ensure that military personnel are as well prepared as their machines to meet the challenge. Our servicemen and women deserve no less from us. This is not possible without a sustained investment in human-oriented research.