PDA

View Full Version : Adrenal Response: A Foregone Conclusion?



Kit LeBlanc
12th June 2002, 16:00
Taking a cue from the knife thread, I thought this might be an interesting discussion, particularly for the professionals and trainers here.

What are your thoughts on adrenal response? Is it a foregone conclusion, and so you MUST train with it in mind, or DOES training eliminate it or minimize it.

I personally believe BOTH, it IS a foregone conclusion (unless you happen to be training in an art that changes your brain chemistry and neurological makeup so that you are no longer bound by the human condition and physical laws).....of course, we see a lot of that on the boards as well :rolleyes:

But I believe that realistic training and understanding of tactics, even in the instant of attack, will go a long way toward mitigating the effects of adrenal dump. Coupled with ongoing practical experience, I believe the sum total will actually allow adrenal dump to be a force that works FOR you rather than against you, which admittedly some training does not address...in these systems the training itself will have adrenal dump working against you. In the former you will probably feel less negative effect on skill-in-application and less mental chatter than in the latter....when training is not optimized for application.

I read a very interesting book recently, Force Under Pressure, by Lawrence N. Blum (Lantern Books, 2000). The book is fascinating in that he posits that when you see failure to adapt to the stress reaction in combative circumstances and/or stress overload (and subsequent PTSD related syndromes) it is most often because you were not prepared for what you encountered at that time. That is, you were simply not ready to deal with it then through lack of training (thus had no options but pure panic) OR you had the training and experience but the trainng and experience did not prepare you for that particualr circumstance (that move ALWAYS worked before, or I talked with this guy three times, he wasn't threat, now he is trying to take my gun!) or your tactical plan failed or did not foresee the circumstance that evolved (move in on a building with armed robbers inside, contain the place, and suddenly from that van that you are standing behind comes the armed robber no one accounted for, spraying you with an SKS). Says a lot for developing tactical awareness, but I think, also shows that as humans we are vulnerable to such stress because no matter what the dojo wonders want to think , you will not be aware of everything, you may very well be surprised, and your training may not work in the real world.

Of course, none of it may matter at all according a recent piece I heard on NPR. A study was being done of special forces trainees going through what were described as very realistic combat exercises involving escape and evasion, capture and interrogation. They noted that certain people's brain chemistry allows a quicker recovery and return to base level after adrenal dump (they were talking adrenaline and some other chemical with a 'Y' in it...) It was not based on training, but what you were born with, 'cause not everybody had this ability. They were trying to figure out how to GIVE it to everybody by whatever means was available.

Thoughts?

joe yang
13th June 2002, 14:06
Long term, traditional martial arts training, incorporating all the training aids, sparring, breaking, forms, competition, do, in my experience, lead one to learn to cope with the inevitable "adrenaline dump". My problem, too many of the "street effective", CQB, short cut, what ever systems try to skirt this issue, like motivational speakers trying to amp up a sales forces on pop psychology. "Did I say that?"

Train. Train some more. Then train harder. Then train longer. Then train even more still, harder.

kenjgood
13th June 2002, 17:31
My unschooled take on this - no Phd attached to my name.

When Surprised - The base responses are released and “take over”.

When Situationally Aware - the base responses are released but can be controlled and used to your benefit.

Otherwise why train at all?

The idea that a life and death situation always brings out an uncontrollable response is hogwash in my opinion.

Examples outside of armed or unarmed encounters:

1. Freefalling out of an airplane
2. Free climbing on a sheer rock face
3. Driving a Formula 1 car into a corner at 230 mph
4. Seeing a horrendous crash in front of you on the freeway

Most firearms instructors understand that anticipation of the recoil is the overwhelming cause of missed shots by beginning shooters.

A response by the Sympathetic Nervous System (SNS) is initiated by one of three things:
Fear of Death – Fear of Serious Bodily Harm- Fear of Pain

When a new shooter has an unfamiliar piece of equipment that is emitting a loud sound, a noticeable flame, and a strong pulse through the hand…the SNS is responding accordingly. Can this be overcome? Of course it can! To say that everybody no matter what is going to react to this stimulus in X manner is simply not true.

The first time a person sees a right-hand coming down the pike to make harsh impact with their own face, the “natural” reaction is to duck, flinch and recoil away. Is the best response? Probably not. Can you inculcate a different response to the same stimulus…most certainly yes.

I have seen Discovery type shows an U.S. astronauts during liftoff. Heartbeat monitors indicate that many of them are totally calm during this phase of the operation.

There was a great article in a the Surfers Journal that contained an interview with some of the world’s best big wave surfers. The common theme….when faced with the reality of death, be calm.

I have heard tapes of airline pilots bringing crippled aircraft, with a totally calm demeanor. The one that is most notable in my mind is a full-sized jet that was crash landed somewhere in the mid-west. No hydraulics! He used engine thrust to turn and change altitude to get the thing on the runway. A few were killed, but most lived.

For years I have conducting Force-on-Force training in which people do the same thing when faced with a gun that shoots projectiles that cause pain. They duck, they run, they flinch, they turn there backs….all responses that have potentially deadly consequences. Through videotape anylisis, folks first see the folly of this and understand that it does them no good whatsoever. Once the consciously understand that this behavior needs to be changes, they consciously attempt to overcome it in the next drilling sessions. The difference in movement, responses and return fire capability is significant from Monday to Friday. They don’t look or act like the same people. It is backed up by many emails that I receive from officers that eventually get into a gunfight and prevail.

I.E. -


19 Mar 2000
My name is Steve Mescan and I took you Team Tactics Course in May of 1999. I am a SWAT Team member from the city of Pittsburgh Bureau of Police.
I would like to take minute to express one of my experiences.

On August 27, 1999 I was returning to the station in a quite area of the city, at approximately three in the morning. The front of Zone 6 station is almost all glass and not bullet proof. While walking into the station, two gunman in a vehicle, one with a 9 mm, and the other with a .45 cal, opened fire on me and three other officers. The first round missed my head by inches and then I was struck in the foot once by a 9mm and then with shrapnel from a .45 caliber.

As the gun fire erupted I found myself, even though I had been shot, on my shooting platform, working the angle, and rather than running from the threat putting them under duress. Though I did not fire a shot, because my back drop was full of residential houses, the suspects who were caught stated they saw me point my gun out towards them which caused them to flee. In all 29 shots were fired at the station.

I credit the training I received from you and your cadre as to the reason this incident didn't turn out worse. First I realized the back lighting situation and immediately told another officer to turn the lights off. I began to move at the suspects to aquire a site picture while doing so I caught myself "breathing up" and controlling my adrenaline. I knew I was shot, but because of the type of training and duress that I was put under during those three days at Team Tactics, made 29 rounds feel like a walk in the park. I believe that the training I received helped me not react so quickly, that I simply reacted with emotion and began to "spray and pray" out the front of the station house.

Instead, I was able to remain disciplined and turn the tides of the encounter. I would like to thank you and your staff for the training I received. It may have saved my life and the lives of others. I can say, as a trainer, that the Team Tactics Course was the best course I have been to in my seven year career.

Keep up the good work and if there is anything I can do for you guys please don't hesitate to ask! I Hope to train with you again in the future!!
Steve Mescan
Pittsburgh SWAT


Like many things in life, your mental preparation, physical fitness, true understanding of the tasking required, all impact the response to any given stimulus in that particular environment.

If you don’t train, do expect to get the job done.

Kit LeBlanc
13th June 2002, 19:26
That was great, Ken.

I think we should also point out that REALISTIC training is what will prepare you for "dump" and how to be energized with it and respond with presence of mind.

There is plenty of training out there that cannot and does not prepare you for it. Quality of training is just as, if not more important, than quantity.

AmerROSS
14th June 2002, 15:15
Kit, great post. There's been a fervor as of late regarding the absolutism of "adrenaline-based conditioning." Blind ascription to any unquestioned method may lead to some pretty hazardous training results.

Ken, you may not be attaching a PhD, but you're comments ring pretty clear to me.

My team researches this phenomenon. We now compile data. Our research, thus far, may conclude the following: training converts hormonal "dump" into gradual hormonal release.

The more accurate the training represents the emotional climate of the venue (realism), the more an emotional frame of reference the trainee develops. The nervous system interprets similar experience allowing subsequent re-cognition of the event. The potential result can be decreased emotional arousal.

Our research thus far appears to conclude that the regulation of autonomic arousal (respiratory rate and depth, heart rate, blood pressure, muscular tension, and others) appears to impact hormonal arousal.

As Ken so clearly states, left unattended, the default setting of our genetic life-support setting engages: called "Unconditional Reflexes" - context-free defensive behavior.

"Adrenaline-based conditioning" appears to emotionally charge a few Unconditional Reflexes "converting" them into: "Conditional Emotional Reactions" - context-specific offensive behavior.

However, as illustrated by Ken's examples, individuals subjected to high-stress situation can still have calm performance if they through "efficiently effective" training develop: "Coping Responses" - context-sensitive offensive or defensive behavior.

From our research thus far, the total response mechanism appears to be:

1. Sensory - Warning stimulus (as Ken states, awareness and training determine how behavior links to the stimulus.)

2. Physical - "Linked" Behavior (Unconditional Reflex, Conditioned Emotional Reaction, or Coping Response.)

3. Emotional - Autonomic Arousal

4. Emotional - Hormonal Arousal

5. Emotional - Feelings

6. Mental - Impressions

7. Mental - Cognition

8. Physical - Conscious Motor Action ("conventional" skill training for combative preparedness only begins here)

After initial response, 3-7 feed into subsequent performance (8), either positively or negatively depending upon emotional threshold training.

We conclude, thus far, that some combat sport, traditional martial art, hostile subject control systems and close-quarter combat systems may inadvertantly lower autonomical arousal. We intended to do this directly and immediately: the premise of our system and the focus of my team's R&D.

Thus far we have proven that our system, FRSC (Force-Responsive Subject-Control), directly lowers autonomic arousal encoding increased sophistication of Coping Responses, through effective awareness training, emotional threshold training, and mental agility training.

Ken, I really enjoyed your post. Impressive clarity and testimonial.
Kit, superb post. I look forward to reading the findings and conclusions of others.

Fraternal,
Scott Sonnon
FRSC Systems, Inc.
www.SubjectControl.com

Kit LeBlanc
14th June 2002, 17:15
Scott,

Thanks for joining in. I think this topic calls brings up so many more issues.

Like you guys, I do not believe that we should ASSUME that the "dump" will result in the negative effects that are commonly associated with such a phenomenon, and are taught as such. While purely anecdotal, personal experience in confrontations of varying types has shown me that I do not always experience it in the same way. Some more dangerous situations have resulted in less or none of an experience of adrenal stress than other, less dangerous situations. A lot had to do with how the encounter developed or unfolded as well as level of preparation.

We should be teaching KNOWLEDGE of how and why it can happen, what it means, and what you can do to minimize or lessen it when it does happen.

I think it is foolish to say that it won't happen if only you are trained properly. Indeed, if someone is taught that if they are well trained and prepared it WON'T happen, and they encounter something they did not expect in the field and it DOES, they now have to deal with "why is this happening? It is not supposed to happen to me because I am trained but it is, so what does that mean? " Not something you want to be dealing with in a fight for your life. There are plenty of cases of people being blindsided, ambushed and totally unprepared for what was occurring and yet accessed their training and their will to victory THRU the adrenalin dump and dominated and overcame the situation.

It seems more cops get killed on "routine" calls that go bad than on SWAT callouts or "man with gun" calls. I have no doubt that many of them were completely surprised and got caught inside their opponents decision cycle and had to deal with the effects of adrenal dump while trying to figure out what to do and were too late. I think they probably either had not been conditioned in training to turn such a situation around, were not used to someone not obeying commands and violently and antagonistically fighting back, or lacked the warrior mindset to fight against the tide of chemicals in their brains that were saying "give up! Lay down and curl up and you will be safe, the bad man will stop hurting you!"



I think the whole idea of surprise/preparedness for the circumstances is crucial. If you have experienced same or similar things in realistic training, and developed appropriate strategies to deal with them, coping in the real world will be easier.

But training is not reality. The advantage in training is that you KNOW it is training so you know it (or something) is coming. (Just put Sim gear on people and watch how differently they handle training situations, even those calling for no use of force.) It is stressful but I think in a different way than the real world.

In reality, the difference is the unknown, but it is also habituation and to what we are accustomed. This makes situational awareness crucial. Since we learn from experience, what is detrimental is that which we deal with every day. In law enforcement we handle disputes, suspicious subjects, etc. every day and there is a strong tendency toward habit and complacency because usually nothing happens.

While taught in theory to expect the unexpected, we are conditioned by what we experience every day, and so, when the unexpected DOES arise, some people are unprepared to deal with it, or are caught by their assailants actions and their brain starts going: "This isn't supposed to happen! This didn't happen the last 627 times! This has never happened to me!" Training can mitigate that but never erase it entirely. There are too many human and situational variables for that to occur.


We also have to address the fact that while you train and practice visualization and watch training videos etc. you picture using lethal force against the big, tatttooed con or biker with rotten teeth, and the first time you may have to use lethal force in the real world is against a 12 year old kid who looks like your own child/nephew/brother whatever. Something unexpected but of a different order.

To further tie it all in to budo, I think this is the reason so much of the koryu, for example, is bound up in mikkyo, spells for invulnerabiliy and protections, the use of mudra and talismans and magical symbols to beg protection from the gods, etc. They knew training would only go so far in actual battle and knew they needed all the help they could get to deal with chance, the unexpected and the unknown. They tried to maximize their prospects for victory through clouding the enemies mind with tactics and magic, seizing initiative and never giving it back, or trying to turn any loss of intitiative around because they knew those circumstances were fatal. Perhaps the primary effect was the one these practices had on their minds.

AmerROSS
14th June 2002, 18:16
Kit, great post.

"We should be teaching KNOWLEDGE of how and why it can happen, what it means, and what you can do to minimize or lessen it when it does happen."

We concentrate primarily on KNOWLEDGE and the critically APPLYING that knowledge through drills.

"I think it is foolish to say that it won't happen if only you are trained properly."

Absolutely!

A few critical quotes of yours which I would like to punctuate:

1. "In reality, the difference is the unknown, but it is also habituation and to what we are accustomed."

2. "While taught in theory to expect the unexpected, we are conditioned by what we experience every day, and so, when the unexpected DOES arise, some people are unprepared to deal with it"

3. "But training is not reality. The advantage in training is that you KNOW it is training so you know it (or something) is coming."

These quotes illustrate a very important insight. Reality scenario building and simulation training is as valuable as it best affects performance under chaos.

In sport psychology, it is well understood that very often it is not precision skills nor genetic attributes which determine victory. Very often the victor is the one who minimizes errors and recovers more quickly WHEN errors occur, and familiarizes with unexpected events and recovers more quickly from shock and surprise. In sport psych., this is known simply as "toughness" - resilient resistance to failure. For instance, sports peak performance occurs not in optimizing skills, but in dealing with internal dialogue ("This has never happened to me!") and how to recover most rapidly from it.

We based the formulation of our system on this understanding: drills should not be "expect the unexpected" in THEORY, but in REALITY. Our research and system design at this time concludes that we dedicate the following general priority of performance goals for our drills: Toughness, Attributes, Skills.

This is just our system, and our current level of research. One thing is certain. There are probably more efficient and effective delivery systems for emotional threshold training that we shall research and discover/develop in the future. It takes vigilance and constant evolution. Like an old coach of mine once said, "we must be willing to sacrifice what you think you know, for who you could become." That tenet guides innovative research.

Again great post, Kit. I'm untethered for the Father's Day weekend. Talk to you next week.

Fraternal,
Scott Sonnon
FRSC Systems, Inc.
www.SubjectControl.com

Darren Laur
14th June 2002, 18:31
Kit:

First and foremost, excellent post

As you are aware, I authored a post on this forum called ¡" The Anatomy Of Fear And How It Relates To Survival Skills Training¨ which looks at this issue more from a researched ¡§scientific¡¨ standpoint. I'm not going to regurgitate that article here, but suffice to say that I believe that both the scientific and empirical research has shown, that a "trained¨ behaviour will be inhibited for economy in movement (especially if that trained behaviour is not congruent with what the amygdala will cause the body to do) when survival reaction time is minimal.

To highlight this belief, I'm going to tread into a debate that elicits sometimes very heated discussions to illustrate this "congruency¨ issue.

In an empirical study conducted by Westmoreland (1989) he compared two shooting styles/systems (Weaver and Isosceles) to see which were more suitable during times of what he called ¡§Combat Stress¡¨ In this study Westmoreland utilized dynamic scenario based training which used dye marking rounds. This study examined 98 shooting scenarios that were either spontaneous or non-spontaneous in nature. It should also be noted that the majority of the officers used in this research project were "Weaver" practitioners. The results of this study:


Spontaneous under 10 feet: 39 total scenarios

96.7 % isosceles (29 events)
3.3 % weaver ( 1 event)
62.1 % one-handed stance (18 events)
23.1% failed to respond ( 9 events)


Spontaneous over 10 feet: 27 total scenarios

92.6 % isosceles (25 events)
7.4% Weaver (2 events)
14.8% one-handed stance (4 events)


Non-spontaneous under 10 feet: 27 total scenarios

74.1% isosceles (20 events)
25.9% weaver (7 events)


Non-spontaneous over 10 feet: 5 total scenarios

60.0% isosceles (3 events)
40.0% weaver (2 events)


Study Totals:
56.1 % two handed Isosceles stance (55 events)
12.2 % one-handed stance (12 events)
22.5 % two handed weaver stance (22 events)
9.2% officers failed to respond


This original study by Westmoreland created quite the debate in the weaver vs isosceles camps, and stood alone until 1997 when a respected firearms instructor by the name of Bill Burroughs ( former assistant Director of the Sigarms Training Academy)

Burroughs study asked two questions:

what does the "average" trained officer resort to when faced with a simulated and spontaneous lefe threatening assault

and how does this response compare to the officer's previously trained shooting stance


Burroughs study involved 157 officers:

47% were Weaver trained
17% were Isosceles trained
32% stated that they used a Natural stance


All 157 officers were placed into 188 life threatening dynamic training scenarios, which utilized Simunition Technology. The review of video found that once placed into a dynamic/spontaneous situation the above noted percentages changed dramatically:

59% of the 157 officers adopted an Isosceles Stance
19% of the 157 officers adopted a Weaver stance
7% adopted a natural stance
the rest did not respond at all

Burroughs further stated that based upon his observations, those officers that remained in the Weaver stance had the opportunity to pre-select their stance before the scenario became critical.



These above two studies were further tested by Steve Barron and Clyde Beasly of Hocking College in Ohio. Both of these instructors are firearm managers for the regional police academy. Hocking College was teaching "Weaver" to recruits, but when these same recruits were moved from static range training to dynamic force on force simulation training using Simunition cartridges, they noted consistently that the taught Weaver stance was not being used. Instead, they observed that these same recruits would adopt a two handed Isosceles shooting platform


Many of the experts in the field of Sports Psychology and Human Performance do not find the above noted research that surprising. In fact, Robert Weinberg (Ph.D) , a well known and highly respected Sports Psychologist, stated (after reviewing Westmoreland's research) " One principal which seems appropriate is that individuals usually return to their preferred or instinctual mode of behaviour especially under stress. When put into a stressful situation, it is instinctual to face your opposition rather than turn to the side" It has been my experience, based upon hundreds of force on force simulations, both armed and unarmed that when a suddenly and spontaneously attacked in close quarters, one's natural instinct is to face the opponent with hand up. It is also interesting to note that this is the same stance that most animals will assume that defend themselves on two legs.



The purpose of the above noted studies is not to get into the debate between Weaver and Isosceles shooters, but rather to demonstrate that fact that if a trained response is not "congruent" with what neuroscientists have called the "Somatic Reflex Potentiation" , Scott Sonnon calls "Unconditional Reflex", others have called the "Flinch Response", it will be over ridden.


As I stated in my posting on the "Anatomy Of Fear":

- The brain has been ¡§hard-wired¡¨ to deal with the emotion of fear (which triggers the adrenaline dump)
- One pathway is known as the "high road" in which action can be based on conscious will and thought. This pathway appears to take effect during "progressive" types of fear stimuli. Here combative students will be able to apply stimulus/response type training using the OODA model.
- A second pathway is known as the "low road" which is triggered by a spontaneous/unexpected attack. Here, the brain will take control of the body with immediate "protective" type reflexes which will override any system of combat that bases its ability on "cognitively" applying a physical response. This is especially true if the trained response is not congruent with the "protective reflex" ( as can be seen in the above noted studies)



My point is this, these "Somatic Reflex Potentiations", "Unconditional Reflexes", "Flinch Responses" or whatever you want to call them, should be used as the "PLATFORM" from which survival motor skills are taught, utilizing ¡§realistic¡¨ training and repetition. It is my "opinion" that using this model will allow officers to utilize the "Adrenaline/Fear Response" in a positive, rather than negative, way.


Strength and Honor

Darren Laur

INFINOO
14th June 2002, 20:22
Is this a disscussion about and for law enforcement or can the general public pile on.:cool:
First off, Im surprised no one has mentioned the role and importance of breathing in the "managment" of adrenaline in high stress situations like CQB. For instance I "know" first hand that when most people get surprised or confronted with real danger they tend to "breath in" to the top part of the chest. "BOO" This makes the chest rise and the center of gravity go up. If breathing isnt regulated the heart rate goes through the roof. However if you can exale pushing from the lower belly as a first response or even second response than the body naturally sinks. Heart rate still climbs, just slower as some others this thread have mentioned.
I have used this breathing tech successfully in my share of fights , photojournalism(hard news) and winter driving(black ice) to name a few examples.
As for the rest of this most excellent thread, some of the big words thrown around make Greg's head hurt:rolleyes:. I just know that when the chips are down and the familiar rush washes through me its "warm and good" makes Greg happy:)
I see it as my edge. As long as ," I keep bad air out , good air in." Everything seems to fall into place for me. Discussions like this are great, its just that Im just afraid if "I" pick it apart to much, I might loss my instints, which have never let me down. Perhaps there really is somthing to the reptile mind. Thanks for letting citizen Rogalsky interupt the thread.
Regards
Gregory Rogalsky
Rogalsky Combatives International
Calgary Alberta Canada

AmerROSS
14th June 2002, 20:36
Greg, very insightful post and direct to the point. I don't think that Ken, Kit and Darren missed you point, but rather we at this time were not focusing on the HOW, but rather that "adrenaline-based conditions" assumes some truths as absolute.

In my first post I wrote, "Our research thus far appears to conclude that the regulation of autonomic arousal (respiratory rate and depth, heart rate, blood pressure, muscular tension, and others) appears to impact hormonal arousal." With our clinical psychologist and behavioral specialist, Dr. Robert Stein, Ph.D., we learned that there are two effective means of visceral control (controlling autonomic arousal):
1. respiratory manipulation (several traditional disciplines focused here for centuries, and more modern disciplines attend here as well);
2. biofeedback manipulation of heart rate (now the vogue in sports peak performance training).
From our current research, we believe your post to be very accurate, Greg.
The question becomes, how, when and why to program respiratory exercise and performance goals into drills. This is one of the focal points in our system.

Darren, superb post. My only concern regards converting Unconditional Reflexes into Conditioned Emotional Reactions. I am unsure if this is what you state. I do agree that URs can be used as a PLATFORM for subsequent action. However, our research has concluded at this time, that URs can only be converted after one complete round of response (1-8 enumerated in my post above.) I'm interested to learn more about your research conclusions (and everyone else for that matter.)

Fraternal,
Scott Sonnon
FRSC Systems, Inc.
www.SubjectControl.com

Kit LeBlanc
15th June 2002, 00:03
Originally posted by INFINOO
I know that when the chips are down and the familiar rush washes through me its "warm and good" makes Greg happy:)


Just don't forget to change your underwear afterwards :D

Darren Laur
15th June 2002, 00:51
Scott:

I think we are speaking the same language, but just so that I am clear as to what you mean, can you give a training example/illustration of your 1-8 total response mechanism.(specific to your def. of UR's and how they need to complete one round of response.)

Darren

AmerROSS
17th June 2002, 18:48
Darren,

From our current research into motor science, we have at this time concluded that REACTION TIME takes place between steps 1 and 2, with the phases of Stimulus Perception, Stimulus Identification, Motor Action (Unconditional Reflex, Conditioned Emotional Reaction, Coping Response.) However, total RESPONSE TIME for conscious skill launch requires steps 1 - 8. Again, we are still amidst research here.

To cite an example of our study, thus far:

One client for whom we provide training is a commercial airline pilot. Due to infrequent training sessions and short-duration training requirements, we crafted a program of instruction based our collection of principle intelligence requirements and other essential elements of information.

We devised three-prong training strategy within the POI: Retro-Active (unexpectedly surprised/shocked), Counter-Active (expectedly surprised/shocked), and Pro-Active (through awareness skills, pre-incident assessment and skill selection).

The Retro-Active and Counter-Active strategies we intended to inculcate UR conversion to offensive capabilities. The Pro-Active strategy would not require this and COULD have been a skill, or series of skills, unrelated to the Retro-Active or Counter-Active strategies. However, in light of Yerkes-Dodson Law ("optimal arousal for behavior efficiency decreases with increased task difficulty or complexity." - Sage 1984), we chose to prime a skill similar to the UR conversion in the Retro-Active and Counter-Active strategies.

Through force-on-force scenario management, we discovered that although the Pro-Active strategy should have the quickest motor launch, recorded slower resolution than the scenarios with Retro-Active and Counter-Active strategies. In the scenarios where the individual could effect a Pro-Active strategy, he would receive warning stimuli (1) from a potential hostile subject, call it "woofing." As he collected these pre-incident indicators and assessed the total situation, we monitored an increased heart rate and respiratory rate (3 - autonomic arousal), and visibly noted his patterns of muscular tension.

In each after-action report, the individual elaborated on each psycho-physiological phenomenon he experienced and to the best of his knowledge when he experienced it based upon watching the video reply of each encounter: tonic immobility, tachi-psychia, auditory exclusion, visual distortion, psycho-temporal distortion, etc... (4 - hormonal arousal).

He would then in the AAR report the "feelings" about his performance and state and about the situation and his level of preparation, which resolved from this experience which changed over time and situation (5 - Feelings). We noted with interest that at this step, the greater familiarity with the scenario, the greater his feelings of confidence in his ability to create a solution, REGARDLESS of any unexpected variables introduced into the scenario management.

In the AAR, the individual reported various mental associations or "flashes" to similar experiences in his past (6 - mental impressions). Again, as above, we noted with interest that over time his reports would associate with increasing frequency not to some past event unrelated to training. Over time, his associations he reported were prior combat simulations. (It is yet to be determined in our research, if this is related to the Law of Recency in short-term memory. If anyone has any research in this area, please contact me at my office sonnon@subjectcontrol.com)

Immediately (though the individual reported them occurring simultaneously) internal dialogue regarding the mental associations "floated" through his mind (7 - Cognition). He would often report thinking about something totally unrelated (this of course prior to specific Attentional strengthening methods we employed). The thoughts associated with the mental images and also with the feelings he experienced. Dependent upon his level of exposure to the simulation, he would have positive or negative internal dialogue. However, he would also report interesting non-essential dialogue such as, "I'm really hot and thirst and could really use a beer." We noted with interest that the individual would report these non-essential dialogue comments even while in the midst of contact engagement.

Finally, the individual directed his mind to select a specific skill, or improvised task (8 - Conscious Motor Action). Often times, the individual reported thinking about something he could have done just a moment earlier (Reflection). He reported that he seemed to "feel" better about his performance when he "just acted without thought" (Pre-reflection.) It was at this step that we programmed the Pro-Active strategy.

An important note here, regards the absence of Step 2: Unconditional Reflex, Conditioned Emotional Reaction, or Coping Skill. The required proportional response in Pro-Action seemed to require more conscious decisionary processing than clear and present dangerous stimuli. IOW, threats of imminent jeopardy elicited Step 2.

On to your requested clarification, Darren: When initially attempting to convert his Moro Reflex ("Flinch Reflex") into a Retro-Active and Counter-Active tactic, we found that the individual would process to Step 8. He required a "Conscious Imperative" before he could motor launch, converting the Moro Reflex into an offensive tactic. Often times he reported saying to himself, "Okay, let's GO!" or "NOW!" as well as a host of other personally preferred expletives. :)

Now, the inconclusive data regards the following, and for which we request anyone else's professional research findings:

Thus far, we cannot conclude whether the conversion of the UR into an offensive tactic decreases total response time because it becomes a skill, or because of the individual's familiarity with the scenario.

For instance, over time, we noted a "creeping" transferability of the conversion of the UR to coping response between scenarios, but initially the shock of new scenario, the required data collection/situational assessment, forced the individual into a full cycle of 1-8.

Yes, over time, the cycle did decrease in required time for conscious motor action, but this was not the point of our research, and regards more neuro-muscular efficiency. Plenty of good research has already been conducted into this arena.

We dedicated our research to the PREREFLECTIVE (sometimes called the "Zone" or "Flow-State"), where Coping Responses flow effortlessly without conscious engagement - at Step 2. Yes, the subsequent steps still occurred, but apparently not sequentially, but in parallel. Furthermore, the steps added to performance efficiency and effectiveness rather than detracted.

At this time, our research concludes that Shock Training, or force-on-force simulations, enhances individual ability to habituate to the sensation of shock and surprise. As a result, individual skills appear to increase in transferability between simulations.

At this time, we attempt to determine (without biasing our research with a hypothesis), that it is not "merely" skill proficiency, but situational familiarity (through force-on-force simulations) that determines the skill transferability. We have at this time concluded that the skills must be platformed from URs for expedient transferability. Conditioned Emotional Reactions (conventional motor skills anchored to particular emotionally volatile situations) seem to either be incapable of transferability, or take extreme training time (years to decades) for universal functionality.

For expedient effectiveness, UR conversion to Coping Responses appears to sophisticate the most rapidly.

Again, we look forward to receiving any research that anyone has conducted, here or in confidentially to sonnon@subjectcontrol.com.

I'm on a major detail this week and have only infrequent online capability, so please understand if I cannot be included in length to responses until 24JUN.

Thanks for your past and future responses. This has been valuable to us already.

Fraternal,
Scott Sonnon
FRSC Systems, Inc.
www.SubjectControl.com

Tom Douglas
17th June 2002, 23:18
I recall hearing, in the last month or so, about an Armed Forces study (perhaps the Army Rangers) relating to the apparent genetic component to stress response, i.e., that even though all study participants (soldiers) had received the same basic training, certain ones responded more "calmly--as measured not only by externally-observed behavior but also by measurement of hormonal elements in the blood--than others.

Does anyone recall this study from recent news reports? Regrettably, I can't remember any more of the details, but I'll see if I can find a reference.

Darren Laur
17th June 2002, 23:25
I spoke with Siddle (who works very closely with the US military) two days ago, and he mentioned that in the mid 1990's the US Army Research Laboratory conducted several tests in this area. More specifically "cortisol" (sp?) issues.

hope this helps some

Strength and Honor

Darren Laur

Kit LeBlanc
17th June 2002, 23:42
Tom,

That's what I was referring to in my initial post. It was mainly talking about how it may be differences in brain chemistry that may be the difference.

Darren Laur
18th June 2002, 22:15
Scott:


At this time, we attempt to determine (without biasing our research with a hypothesis), that it is not "merely" skill proficiency, but situational familiarity (through force-on-force simulations) that determines the skill transferability. We have at this time concluded that the skills must be platformed from URs for expedient transferability. Conditioned Emotional Reactions (conventional motor skills anchored to particular emotionally volatile situations) seem to either be incapable of transferability, or take extreme training time (years to decades) for universal functionality.


I had to read your last post a few times to fully understand the process and the scientific language that you use, and I can say, without a doubt, that our beliefs are identical.


Strength and Honor

Darren Laur

matt little
19th June 2002, 17:56
This topic, I believe, is what the samurai were trying to address by including all the so-called "spiritual" training in the classical martial arts. The "flow state" and "mushin" are, to my mind, one and the same. What I find terribly exciting as an instructor about all of the study being done in this area is the possibility that (as has been done already with strength, flexibility, and endurance training) we can update the classical training methods for acheiving this state and reproduce it more reliably in a wider range of trainees in stress situations.

AmerROSS
19th June 2002, 18:19
Darren, thanks for sifting through the vernacular. We need to get together and have a "head-shed."

Matt, it's good to hear from professionals like yourself, who actually operate and coach in this arena.

Not only do we believe traditional training translates into modern science through research, experimentation and collaboration, but we trust that as we continue to do so, we collectively will bring an equally valid and critical understanding from a Western perspective. We do not believe the Western perspective is "better" than an Eastern perspective. Actually, nothing our research team uncovered thus far refutes my studies in Asian philosophy and martial arts; I casually note with curiosity and amusement direct correlation between sport psychology, stress physiology and behavioral science with my prior Uni. studies in the I CHING, the BOOK OF FIVE RINGS and the ART OF WAR. We believe rather that addressing the social demands of a rational perspective and order to training personnel in subject control, self-defense, and close-quarters combatives allows a greater collective edification of the more "esoteric" concepts in martial art.

Fraternal,
Scott Sonnon
FRSC Systems, Inc.
http://www.SubjectControl.com

AmerROSS
20th June 2002, 02:25
Kit, I wanted to thank you for beginning this thread. As a result of doing so you've spawned something very important for my team, at the very least.

Having elaborated on our current research, we decided to scrutinize our understanding of the Survival Stress Response Process (SSRP).

Survival Stress Response Process:
1. warning stimulus
2. unconditional reflex, conditioned emotional reaction, and/or coping response
3. autonomic arousal
4. hormonal arousal
5. feelings
6. mental impressions
7. mental dialogue
8. conscious motor skills

From our research, we determined that conscious skill selection came last in the SSRP. Our research further concluded at the time that the greater number of skills, the greater the reaction time for skill selection (Hick's Law); and the greater the complexity of skills, the greater the reaction time for skill selection and for total response time in skill application (Yerkes- Dodson's Law).

At the time, our research concluded that Unconditional Reflexes ("innate action tendencies associated with discrete emotions of fear, panic and anxiety." - Barlow, 2002), being "hard-wired" skills would "always" take priority over conscious skill application (number 8 from our prior understanding of the SSRP).

However, your question, Kit, illuminated a critical query with which we experimented, "can coping responses override unconditional reflexes?"

Whether peak performance in athletics, or coping skill development for anxiety disorders in behavioral modification, or the "seasoning" of veteran combatants, a particular "sophistication" occurs that allows "experienced" individuals to maintain composure, wherewithal and presence of mind under great duress.

We dedicated our research toward determining the nature of this experience, how to "manufacture" it through drill simulations, training and practice, and how to rationally understand WHY we could successfully "re-produce" the "experience" before the individual needed it. My friend Tony Blauer gave me a T-shirt as a present last year, upon which was written a very poignant catch phrase, "experience is something you need right before the moment you get it."

Our research dedicated towards catching and manufacturing in the most expedient and intense (time-compressed) fashion, this nebulous "experience."

In our opinion, this experience related directly to the production of "Coping Responses" NOT Unconditional Reflexes. Our research began to conclude that as the individual habituated to a particular family of simulations, the individual acted without reflex. We erroneously concluded that the only option equaled - conversion of Unconditional Reflex into offensive action. This is one VERY useful and effective training methodology for time-compressed training demands such as with the limited resources of law enforcement personnel.

However, as we see with certain "extended" training, a peculiar "seasoning" or "sophistication" occurs beyond reflexive training.

Upon guidance from our behavioral specialist, Dr. Robert Stein, Ph.D. (Neurobehavioral Clinic, Ltd. - Pennsylvania), we examined the recent works of Dr. David Barlow, Ph.D., in particular "Anxiety and its Disorders" (2nd Edition, Guilford Press, 2002)

What we discovered (succinctly) regarded our erroneous conclusions regarding the ORDER of the SSRP. With this new understanding, the order is as follows:

1. Warning Stimulus
2. Genetically-determined Neurobiological Reactivity (baseline individualized "irritability" or anxiety sensitivity - NOT Unconditional Reflex - such as Defensive Action Tendencies)
3. Conditioned Emotional Reactivity ("Fear-Reactivity" as I have called it, referring to stored/learned anxiety sensitivity, which can be counter-conditioned with training/therapy) AND/OR Coping Responses (which can be understood as "beyond" counter-conditioning; sophisticated habituation to personal violence, anxiety management)
4. Autonomic Arousal
5. Hormonal Arousal
6. Unconditional Reflexes ("innate action tendencies associated with discrete emotions of fear, panic and anxiety." - Barlow, 2002) It is here that we see the host of psychophysiological phenomena described succinctly upon by Massad F. Ayoob in "Physio-Psychological Aspects of Violent Encounters." The "sophistication" or the "experience" alluded to above my Tony Blauer derails these reflexes being intermingled with a host of detrimental phenomena, such as the "deer-in-the-headlights (tonic immobility).
7. Feelings
8. Mental Impressions
9. Mental Dialogue
10. Conscious skill selection and motor initiation

Basically, this improved model of the SSRP illuminates two critical aspects:

1. the need for counter-conditioning "fear-reactivity" which is NOT the so-called "instinctual" fear reflexes, but rather LEARNED/ conditioned through traumatic experience/memory, and/or inappropriate emotional anchoring of indiscriminate behavior to perceived threats ("learned rage" and "learned helplessness" - Sapolsky, 1998)

As a side note, we often hear the terms de-conditioning (and have ourselves used this term). However, we discovered in behavioral science that this does not exist. We cannot "unlearn" a skill or behavior, but can only counter-condition a behavior or skill with a stronger behavior or skill.

2. the need for habituating to particular stressful situations or crises. The more an individual acclimates emotionally to a particular situation, the more "familiar" the experience, and as a result, the individual cultivates Coping Responses - generalized skill of improvising solutions without conscious intervention. Some describe Coping Responses as "applied intuition."

In conclusion, the implications regard a three-fold protocol depending upon time commitment of personnel:

1. short-term: platform Unconditional Reflexes to convert to offensive actions

2. mid-term: #1 + counter-condition Conditioned Emotional Reactions

3. long-term: #1 + #2 + cultivate Coping Responses

We realize to a large degree the length of time required for each individual varies; however, we greatly concern ourselves with the distinction in time requirements for each protocol. We begin next week on shoring up this new understanding with dedicated research and experimentation.

We have found a significant amount of parochialism when it comes to tactical and combatives research into stress physiology in particular. Many of the "experts" are very reluctant to "share" research findings. However, we believe that only mutual development occurs through research sharing. We don't care who publishes before whom. We're all the "Good Guys."

And no, we disagree with those who comment that publishing such information provides the "Bad Guys" with the ability to know our training. One, they are, in general, not intelligent enough to understand the vernacular, and two, in general, don't have the personal sophistication to act upon the knowledge contained therein. Even personally, dedicating my vocation to this enterprise, I find the field mentally challenging, and at times even inaccessible.

Anyone interested in collaborating with our team, feel free to contact me at sonnon@subjectcontrol.com.

Fraternal,
Scott Sonnon
FRSC Systems, Inc.
http://www.SubjectControl.com

Darren Laur
20th June 2002, 05:04
Scott:

Excellent post, and your three-fold protocol is right on target, and why I have said that HYPNOTHERAPY and NLP will be the next “NEXUS” in combatives training, and have posted this fact on several occasions. It is my belief that these two training enhancement techniques can effectively be used, as you say, to “counter-condition Conditioned Emotional Reactions.” Professional hypnotherapists have been using the science and art of hypnosis to “RE-CONDITION” or “RE-ANCHOR” Conditioned Emotional Reactions”(which are located at the subconscious level) for years, with excellent results. Unfortunately, professional hypnotherapists such as myself, have to constantly battle the image that “most” non-educated people have about hypnotists, that being a stage show which only makes people do things that they would normally not do; i.e. bark like a dog or quack like a duck.

Here at the school we teach in three step process:

1) Techniques are platformed from the “flinch” response (motor skill learning is chunked, and stimulus/response based)
2) Once students become consciously competent in the motor skill, motor skill dropped directly into the subconscious through hypnosis where counter productive Conditioned Emotional Reactions are “Re-Anchored” or “Re-Conditioned”
3) Stress Inoculation (cultivating coping responses) through both dynamic force on force simulations and guided imagery.


It goes without saying, that anything I can do to assist in your research, just give me a call


Strength and Honor

Darren Laur
Integrated Street Combatives

AmerROSS
20th June 2002, 06:16
Dear Darren,

Thank you for your post (and sharing).

Amazing. What a delightful time we live in to experience such synergy in research. Our two teams remind me of the independent "discovery" of calculus by both Leibniz and Newton. :D

We definitely need to chat. Our behavioral specialist, Dr. Stein, is also a licensed hypnotherapist. Re-conditioning is a very positive term. I'm intrigued.

Let's chat offline and collaborate: especially I am interested in "Stress Inoculation" - in 99, I released "Shock Inoculation" and would like to compare methodologies.

Fraternal,
Scott Sonnon
FRSC Systems, Inc.
http://www.SubjectControl.com

Darren Laur
20th June 2002, 06:25
Scott:

If you get his tonight, which I think you will give me a call at the school at 1-250-478-9119. I will be until 1130pm west coast time

Darren

Bod
20th June 2002, 14:17
Darren,

I have read your posts with interest. I am a little confused as to the meaning of this phrase of yours however:

"1) Techniques are platformed from the “flinch” response (motor skill learning is chunked, and stimulus/response based)"

By "Platformed from the flinch response" do you mean:

a) The flinch response itself is converted, such that the immediate response to a stimulus will be some prepared rational action, (possibly depending on the particular stimulus?)

or

b) The practitioner is trained to use the flinch response itself as a stimulus, so that a prepared rational action which flows naturally from that response is performed.

The reason I ask this is that I have been training by envisioning my own flinch response as an 'internal' stimulus, as against an 'external' stimulus, and then practising my preferred footwork/defensive hand stance pattern while imagining stimulus.

Gradually this has improved my reaction to events such as being surprised by my flatmate when he has jumped out at me to similar surprises in the street including a pushbike cutting across my path from around a corner - true surprises.

If the 'reptilian response' of pull back duck and cover is inevitable then this form of training is optimal - a hypothetical example would perhaps be to train LEOs in using their isosceles response as a stimulus to move into a Weaver stance. (I'll admit that I actually know nothing about this area - which is why I offer the example so tentatively.)

If the 'reptilian response' can be totally converted to a more preferable response then obviously my practice strategy is not optimal, and merely an improvement on training without any regard for my natural reactions.

Brently Keen
20th June 2002, 19:03
Fascinating stuff guys.

Once, I wade through all the weighty big words, it seems to me that Darren and Scott's research are both validating much of what I've learned and come to understand through my own training/teaching and personal experiences.

Particularly, the research and subsequent discoveries that Scott referred to that updated or modified the steps of his SSRP. They seem to jive a lot more with my own rather "unscientific" theories.

Thanks for sharing, I hope you'll keep the discussion open and keep the rest of us informed.

Respectfully,

Brently Keen

Kit LeBlanc
21st June 2002, 03:31
Originally posted by Bod


If the 'reptilian response' of pull back duck and cover is inevitable then this form of training is optimal - a hypothetical example would perhaps be to train LEOs in using their isosceles response as a stimulus to move into a Weaver stance. (I'll admit that I actually know nothing about this area - which is why I offer the example so tentatively.)



I think you just have your terminology all jumbled up.

What stress related research is showing is that isoceles, with both arms extended and the weapon thrust out toward the target, shoulders square...is what will happen under stress and is more a gross motor skill than the bladed stance and differences in angle and pressure on the weapon that Weaver gives you.

Most SWAT training, since it involves shooting on the move, uses isoceles or a modified isoceles while in a squared up stance aggressing the target. But shooting at angles, shooting under and around barricades, shooting while moving in different directions etc. are all more involved skills that will still be required in operations, and therefore need a lot more practice to BECOME more instinctive, because you probably won't get that straight on isoceles in many instances.(Besides, try it in a tac vest and you'll see it is pretty hard to get the elbows fully straight out anyway...)

As an aside, my own experience in the field and in training myself and training others has altered the way I deal with DT stuff, in that I don't "blade" the way they teach it at the academy. Of course many tactics instructors nut up at this, and scream "you have to protect your weapon." Frankly blading your stance does very little to provide weapon retention in the kind of assault that leads to/begins with a gun grab. You often see in force on force training that when students that have taken a bladed "interview" stance are actively and aggressively assaulted, they turn square to threat as they bring their strong side forward to deal with the situation...even if they are backpedalling. Hmmmm. Who would have thought that someone would actually try to apply their strong hand as the main tool in dealing with a violent assault? Whomever came up with the idea that the "flinch response" was a good thing to train, that's who. (Blauer calls it SPEAR, others call it the Wedge, some traditional arts have the same concept, and others don't call it anything but instinctive reaction to physical assaults.)

Otherwise,

I think Matt hit on a point that needs to be addressed in all this talk of "the dump." The "spiritual" aspect...

Not in the sense of God and Righteous Killing vs. Thou shalt not Murder and all that (though certainly that plays a big part in how one deals with a lethal threat and the aftermath and is a whole 'nother discussion), but in the more prosaic Asian sense like that meant in the Sun Zi and other works...the mind and fighting spirit.

I think this is where the classical arts just *might* have something to offer if the people with the proper experience and mindset, and undertstanding of force on force training address them..because kata (two person) done right is the original force on force training (though so many people mistake sparring for force on force.) The arts also try to address many of the "spiritual" factors through that training (those which we are learning get exposed in force on force training that is realistic enough) and had their own strategies for dealing with such things such as I alluded to before. Thing is finding the right people with the right background and the "eyes to see" to explore and assess these things to bring out that subset of methods which might help the armed professionals today...both those willing to really internalize the deepest teachings and those who just need the basics 'cause it might just help them survive.

George Ledyard
21st June 2002, 03:45
Originally posted by Kit LeBlanc

As an aside, my own experience in the field and in training myself and training others has altered the way I deal with DT stuff, in that I don't "blade" the way they teach it at the academy. Of course many tactics instructors nut up at this, and scream "you have to protect your weapon." Frankly blading your stance does very little to provide weapon retention in the kind of assault that leads to/begins with a gun grab. You often see in force on force training that when students that have taken a bladed "interview" stance are actively and aggressively assaulted, they turn square to threat as they bring their strong side forward to deal with the situation...even if they are backpedalling.

Having played a fair amount with gun retention stuff my guys have found that the old belief that the gun side should be away from the subject is not necessarily an advantage. Once you get a clinch ie. grappling range it is actually easier to work the gun if it farther away rather than close. When it is too close, attempts to grab it result in jamming the arm and the attacker is much less effective. Plus when the attacker attempts to grab the gun when it is close to him he presents better targets for impact technique than he does if he can achieve a tight clich and still work the weapon.