SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Abstract

The National Vietnam Veteran Readjustment Study (NVVRS; R. A. Kulka et al., 1988) has been highly influential, but critics argue that the study had several flaws. In this article, the author addresses how the recent NVVRS reevaluation (B. P. Dohrenwend et al., 2006) refutes most of the critic's major concerns including that self-report of exposure to war-zone stressors could not be verified, that PTSD did not require functional impairment, and that PTSD prevalence was too high for a low-intensity war in which relatively few veterans were assigned to combat military operation specialties. The author also addresses misleading statements made by critics discussing the NVVRS, the reevaluation, and related articles. The proper role of science and public policy, the importance of reporting findings accurately, and placing findings in proper perspective are discussed.