{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.029069767441860465, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0029069767441860465, 'mean_word_length': 5.932885906040268, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
What Do the Soldiers Say?

Doctrinally, the U.S. Army determines the readiness of company-sized and battalionsized units by assessing them in four areas: personnel, equipment on hand, equipment serviceability, and training to meet mission-essential tasks. Surprisingly, these assessments do not include factors identified in surveys, personal interviews, and observational accounts of soldiers regarding what prepares them for combat and contributes to their combat effectiveness. Among the more prominent of these factors are the quality of small (primary) group relationships and the competencies of unit leaders. The present study considers these factors in addition to doctrinal readiness assessments. Soldier perceptions combined with doctrinal assessments (1) more readily differentiated the readiness of units; (2) were associated with independently derived soldier perceptions of fellow soldiers, leaders, and equipment being prepared for combat operations; and (3) implied interventions to improve specific unit activities.