"Psychology of Intelligence Analysis"

https://www.cia.gov/csi/Psychology/PsychofIntelNew.pdf

Yes, I know... its a link into the CIA. But nevertheless, it is an interesting read. Not only is the information and analysis it contains interesting in its own right, it is particularly interesting in light of the "intelligence failure" of 9/11.

Heuer does a respectible job of revealing how flaws in one's thinking process distort one's ability to reason, and by extension how one can easily exploit someone else's thinking flaws. (This is, of course, readily evident in today's MSM coverage of the "war of terror". Oops, I meant war -on- terror.)

As far as copyright violations, well, its on the CIA site, "what can go wrong"?

:)

Having read 1/3 of the book so far I think it might me considered a mandatory read for many of us. Information regarding flaws of reasoning, analysis as well as methods of improvement thereof is delivered briefly thus making it an exellent introductory read for anyone interested in the subject. It seems CIA folks aren't completely useless for us after all ;)

I agree. I'm about 1/3 through also. I notice that it was published in 1999, before 9/11. Seems that it was pretty useless for the Bush Administration!!!

Added: Geeze, the more I read, the more it sounds like this guy was using the same kinds of ideas that we have utilized about how the mind works and how to deal with cognitive "habits" and entrenched circuits.

In some places, it almost sounds like some of our QFS work. Bizarre!

As I continue to read, I notice the "basic" and even "simplified" nature of the material presented in this book.

If, as I assume, this is how the issue has been "simplified" for the understanding of intelligence analysts, then it seems that intelligence analysts must, as a group, be pretty dumb. Some of these ideas are so basic that it is amazing that they even have to be written down for a group of people that are supposed to be figuring out things.

For example, that in analyzing the political situation of another country, you have to see it from a the point of view of that other country, how they think, their cultural biases, etc.

I mean, duhhhh!

Somehow, I don't feel safer knowing how dumb these people are.

The book is available freely on their page, so we can ask ourselves why is it so? Is this book some kind of excuse for CIA incompetence? Or maybe they would like us to think they are so dumb?

j0da said:

The book is available freely on their page, so we can ask ourselves why is it so? Is this book some kind of excuse for CIA incompetence? Or maybe they would like us to think they are so dumb?

Click to expand...

Double purpose:

1) To make us to think that they are so dumb.
2) To register IP's of those who are interested in their stuff

It seems to be not very significant, but when added to their database that contains other information, it helps
them to automatically build a profile.

Note: 1) does not exclude the possibility that most of them are really dumb. But it would be a mistake to think that all of them are dumb.

arkmod said:

j0da said:

The book is available freely on their page, so we can ask ourselves why is it so? Is this book some kind of excuse for CIA incompetence? Or maybe they would like us to think they are so dumb?

Click to expand...

Double purpose:

1) To make us to think that they are so dumb.
2) To register IP's of those who are interested in their stuff

It seems to be not very significant, but when added to their database that contains other information, it helps
them to automatically build a profile.

Note: 1) does not exclude the possibility that most of them are really dumb. But it would be a mistake to think that all of them are dumb.

Click to expand...

I've used US technical manuals produced by Boeing, it's amazing how easy the instructions tend to be. The big advantage over the RAF manuals is that the US ones have a 'fault list' in which they'll detail a known fault, how to check which circuit it could be and which component to replace. I've had the above-mentioned pdf since the first post, just not got around to reading it although I need to bump up the list this one, C of Z & Mask Of Sanity.

Laura said:

As I continue to read, I notice the "basic" and even "simplified" nature of the material presented in this book.

Click to expand...

Remember this is being supplied *by* the CIA on their own web site. In addition, this book is available in paperback on Amazon.
http://www.amazon.com/Psychology-Intelligence-Analysis-Richards-Heuer/dp/0160590353/sr=8-1/qid=1160411627/ref=sr_1_1/104-3540709-4980728?ie=UTF8&s=books
It is well known that people who work (or worked) in the intelligence community require "approval" from the CIA before publishing anything. The basic or simplified nature of the material means that they do not want you to really know just how deep this rabbit hole actually goes. As I stated, knowing how "intelligence failures" occur also means that you can create them...

Laura said:

If, as I assume, this is how the issue has been "simplified" for the understanding of intelligence analysts, then it seems that intelligence analysts must, as a group, be pretty dumb. Some of these ideas are so basic that it is amazing that they even have to be written down for a group of people that are supposed to be figuring out things.

Click to expand...

I can see that you observed the same thing I did, which is that the first 1/3 of the book is "more profound" than the rest... I would suggest that this sudden collapse of the rigor of the presentation is more a reflection of the required edits than the depth of the original thought process. I don't expect an official treatise on the specific techniques involved in Greenbauming any time soon...

Laura said:

For example, that in analyzing the political situation of another country, you have to see it from a the point of view of that other country, how they think, their cultural biases, etc.

I mean, duhhhh!

Click to expand...

And yet, the Bush administration seems to have completely lost this point, yes? "While the media is reporting on reality, (they) are creating reality" ignoring the whole point that they are not the only ones creating it all... So what does this mean? Who is doing the true manipulating here? Is Bush (yeah, right, Mr. "somewhere in Texas a village is missing its idiot") manipulating the intelligence community or is it somehow reversed?

Laura said:

Somehow, I don't feel safer knowing how dumb these people are.

Click to expand...

No, I [somewhat] disagree. I take this book to mean that they have thought about this several levels deeper than is being presented and that they have a non-trivial and deep understanding of the psychology of humans in many many situations. This implies that the manipulations and behind-the-scenes activities can be difficult to discover or discern, particularly for the average 'Merican. As Gene Wilder states: "You've gotta remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the New West. You know ... morons."

Actually, that there exists this kind of psychological analysis capability within a secret organization such as the CIA is itself the reason I do not feel safer...

Yeah. No matter how you slice it, we are still up the creek.

rs said:

https://www.cia.gov/csi/Psychology/PsychofIntelNew.pdf

Click to expand...

That page doesn't exist anymore :/
Does anyone have a knowledge of some other link that works,
or maybe willing to share that pdf file, if still having it?

Thank you

Color said:

That page doesn't exist anymore :/

Click to expand...

Hmm, you are correct. So, the C.I.A. figures out that we are getting too smart from reading this work.

It's here:

http://www.delirandom.net/x/external/CIA_Psychology_Of_Intelligence_Analysis.pdf

It may not be relevant, but it is interesting that Robert Gates is mentioned. Is
that the same 'Robert Gates' chosen by Bush to lead the CIA/Homeland?

Seems that no matter how careful the book is written to educate the "dumb"
analyst, it still has to reach the upper tiers, the policy-makers, and if it does
not meet their approval, it has to go back for re-analysis in order to reshape
the facts to fit their policies? Isn't that what happened with Tenet at the
helm? What does that say about Gates, or anyone else at the helm?