ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2026
The keys to success: personality traits and mental strategies are associated with success indicators in special forces selection.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The selection process for the German Armed Forces Special Forces places extreme physical and psychological demands on candidates. The aim of this study was to examine associations between psychological traits and indicators of success in the multi-stage potential assessment procedure (PFV) and to explore individual resources and mental strategies reported by applicants under high stress. Specifically, we examined whether (H1) conscientiousness and cognitive performance are associated with PFV performance, (H2) successful applicants report self-regulation strategies (e.g., goal setting, self-talk, mental visualization, arousal control) and psychological protective factors (e.g., perseverance/grit, optimism, value-based meaning orientation) more frequently, and (H3) resilience is associated with marksmanship performance during training. Methodology: A sequential explanatory mixed-methods design was applied. In the quantitative part, a secondary analysis of psychological PFV data (N = confidential) was carried out. Associations between personality traits and success indicators (internal PFV ranking; external shooting performance) were examined using Spearman rank correlations. In the qualitative part, guided interviews with applicants (N = confidential) were analyzed using qualitative content analysis following a deductive-inductive approach. Results: In line with H1, conscientiousness (r = -.74, p <.05) and cognitive performance (r = -.72, p <.05) showed significant associations with better PFV performance. In line with H3, resilience was significantly associated with better shooting performance during training (r = .70, p <.05). The qualitative analysis revealed recurring self-regulation strategies and psychological protective factors that were descriptively reported more frequently by successful participants. Conclusion: The findings indicate that specific personality traits and self-regulation-related resources are associated with performance-related indicators within the PFV context. The integration of quantitative and qualitative results provides exploratory insights relevant for psychological assessment and mental preparation in a high-performance military setting. Given the study design, conclusions regarding prediction or causality are not warranted; future longitudinal studies with larger samples are needed to examine robustness, generalizability, and temporal stability of the observed associations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.