Shades of Gray: Releasing the Cognitive Binds That Blind Us
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Calhoun, Institutional Archive of the Naval Postgraduate School Calhoun: The NPS Institutional Archive Theses and Dissertations Thesis and Dissertation Collection 2016-09 Shades of gray: releasing the cognitive binds that blind us Hensley, Patrick D. Monterey, California: Naval Postgraduate School http://hdl.handle.net/10945/50558 NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA THESIS SHADES OF GRAY: RELEASING THE COGNITIVE BINDS THAT BLIND US by Patrick D. Hensley September 2016 Thesis Co-Advisors: Kathleen Kiernan John Rollins Approved for public release. Distribution is unlimited. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instruction, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188) Washington DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED (Leave blank) September 2016 Master’s Thesis 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS SHADES OF GRAY: RELEASING THE COGNITIVE BINDS THAT BLIND US 6. AUTHOR(S) Patrick D. Hensley 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING Naval Postgraduate School ORGANIZATION REPORT Monterey, CA 93943-5000 NUMBER 9. SPONSORING /MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND 10. SPONSORING / ADDRESS(ES) MONITORING AGENCY N/A REPORT NUMBER 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES The views expressed in this thesis are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government. IRB protocol number ___N/A ____. 12a. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited 13. ABSTRACT (maximum 200 words) The United States Intelligence Community is tasked with providing the intelligence necessary to protect the homeland and U.S. interests abroad. Technology acts as a force multiplier for intelligence analysts, but that advantage also comes with substantial risk. The risk lies in our reliance on technology and processes, and the tradecraft of intelligence analysis and critical thinking appears to be losing relevance. During the intelligence analysis process, weak signals are often identified and then dismissed. In hindsight, these weak signals are realized as missed opportunities that could have allowed the Intelligence Community to mitigate the threat. This research examines cognitive bias from multiple perspectives and affirms that cognitive bias does influence intelligence analysis, and intelligence analysts need to understand the effects of cognitive bias. This research presents a recent case study and determines the negative influences of those biases had an impact on the decisions that were ultimately made in error. As a result of this research and analysis, several mitigation strategies are identified and included as recommendations to the Intelligence Community. These strategies present the United States with an opportunity to decrease the influences of cognitive bias on intelligence analysis, leading to a more effective and resilient Intelligence Community. 14. SUBJECT TERMS 15. NUMBER OF cognitive bias, intelligence cycle, intelligence analysis, Intelligence Community, decision PAGES making, intuitive thinking, analytical thinking, Benghazi 125 16. PRICE CODE 17. SECURITY 18. SECURITY 19. SECURITY 20. LIMITATION CLASSIFICATION OF CLASSIFICATION OF THIS CLASSIFICATION OF ABSTRACT REPORT PAGE OF ABSTRACT Unclassified Unclassified Unclassified UU NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89) Prescribed by ANSI Std. 239-18 i THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ii Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited SHADES OF GRAY: RELEASING THE COGNITIVE BINDS THAT BLIND US Patrick D. Hensley Captain, Daly City Police Department, Daly City, California B.S., Notre Dame de Namur University, 2008 Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS IN SECURITY STUDIES (HOMELAND SECURITY AND DEFENSE) from the NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL September 2016 Approved by: Kathleen Kiernan Thesis Co-Advisor John Rollins Thesis Co-Advisor Erik Dahl Associate Chair of Instruction Department of National Security Affairs iii THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK iv ABSTRACT The United States Intelligence Community is tasked with providing the intelligence necessary to protect the homeland and U.S. interests abroad. Technology acts as a force multiplier for intelligence analysts, but that advantage also comes with substantial risk. The risk lies in our reliance on technology and processes, and the tradecraft of intelligence analysis and critical thinking appears to be losing relevance. During the intelligence analysis process, weak signals are often identified and then dismissed. In hindsight, these weak signals are realized as missed opportunities that could have allowed the Intelligence Community to mitigate the threat. This research examines cognitive bias from multiple perspectives and affirms that cognitive bias does influence intelligence analysis, and intelligence analysts need to understand the effects of cognitive bias. This research presents a recent case study and determines the negative influences of those biases had an impact on the decisions that were ultimately made in error. As a result of this research and analysis, several mitigation strategies are identified and included as recommendations to the Intelligence Community. These strategies present the United States with an opportunity to decrease the influences of cognitive bias on intelligence analysis, leading to a more effective and resilient Intelligence Community. v THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK vi TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................1 A. DISCUSSION .............................................................................................1 B. PROBLEM STATEMENT .......................................................................2 C. RESEARCH QUESTIONS .......................................................................5 D. SIGNIFICANCE TO THE FIELD...........................................................5 E. LIMITATIONS ..........................................................................................6 F. THESIS OUTLINE AND UPCOMING CHAPTERS............................6 II. LITERATURE REVIEW .....................................................................................7 A. INTRODUCTION......................................................................................7 B. DEFINING THE INTELLIGENCE CYCLE .........................................7 C. DEFINING THE INTELLIGENCE CYCLE ANALYSIS PROCESS .................................................................................................10 D. INTELLIGENCE ANALYST TRAINING PROGRAMS ...................15 E. INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVE ............................18 F. PRIVATE SECTOR INTELLIGENCE PERSPECTIVE ...................24 G. ACADEMIC PERSPECTIVE ................................................................26 H. CONCLUSION ........................................................................................29 III. COGNITIVE BIAS ..............................................................................................31 A. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE .............................................................31 B. PSYCHOLOGICAL DEFINITION .......................................................33 C. RELEVANCE OF COGNITIVE BIAS AWARENESS .......................34 D. SYSTEM 1 AND SYSTEM 2 THINKING ............................................37 E. RELEVANT COGNITIVE BIASES ......................................................41 IV. THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY ............................................................43 A. INTELLIGENCE CYCLE AS A SYSTEM ..........................................43 B. COGNITIVE BIAS CREEP ...................................................................44 C. NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE ESTIMATES ......................................45 D. ISRAELI INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY ........................................51 V. COGNITIVE BIAS MITIGATION STRATEGIES.........................................57 A. INTRODUCTION....................................................................................57 B. PSYCHOLOGICAL STRATEGIES .....................................................58 C. ANALYTICAL STRATEGIES ..............................................................59 1. Alternative Analysis .....................................................................59 vii 2. External Analysis .........................................................................61 3. Structured Analytical Technique ...............................................62 4. Analyst Teams ..............................................................................63 D. TECHNOLOGICAL STRATEGIES .....................................................65