“Critical thinking in intelligence Analysis is a fundamental skill. Discuss”
“Critical thinking in intelligence Analysis is a fundamental skill. Discuss”
Within intelligence analysis (IA), critical thinking (CT) is a fundamental skill, as without it, those tasked with IA would be unable to properly interpret and utilise the information at their disposal, with CT ultimately forming the bedrock of accurate, unbiased, and actionable intelligence assessments. First, CT can be defined as “a deliberate meta-cognitive and cognitive act whereby a person reflects on the quality of the reasoning process simultaneously while reasoning to a conclusion… coming to a solution and improving the way she or he reasons.” With this definition, one can look at CT within IA. First, it is necessary to look at the components of CT before looking at the crucial role CT plays in Ensuring Objectivity as well as the requirement for CT when looking for actionable Insights within IA. It should be noted, however, that CT challenges and limitations do exist; however, these limitations, whilst present, do not detract from CT as a fundamental skill in IA. Therefore, it can be suggested that CT is a fundamental bedrock skill in IA.
First, the key components of CT must be looked at to understand the role it plays within IA. Most commonly, CT will involve the analytical process, the interpretation of data, and the evaluation of sources. CT involves the interplay of these components with analysis, assessing intelligence for its significance while simultaneously being able to reframe or re-conceptualise the intelligence, constructing an argument using what information is available, such as raw intelligence and data. This highlights the interplay of components required to foster CT, all necessary in IA. Furthermore, cognitive biases such as confirmation bias and groupthink can compromise the objectivity of IA, furthering the importance of CT. Instances of Groupthink include the conformity views seen by intelligence analysts surrounding incidents such as the failed invasion of Cuba in 1961; however, it does not include the intelligence failures surrounding the 2001 September 11th attacks. From this, the key components of CT and their value can be seen, with the importance of CT in preventing cognitive biases highlighting its fundamental place in IA.
Secondly, the use of CT during the process of IA can aid in ensuring objectivity and accuracy. The ability to scrutinise and assess the reliability and credibility of information received from various sources is paramount in IA, with CT enabling scrutiny to take place. Source evaluation failings have proved costly, as demonstrated by the 1999 failure to employ CT when assessing the ‘Curveball informant’, with the failure to assess the source critically leading to a questionable intelligence source being falsely assumed to be accurate. Furthermore, CT enables those tasked with IA to use logical analysis and infer information from sources. This can be seen in the days before the Cuban missile crisis, where the CIA Director, John McCone, was the only influential member of the national security establishment to estimate the Soviet deployment of missiles based primarily on logical reasoning. As a result, it can be suggested that CT is a fundamental skill in IA as it aids in ensuring the objectivity and accuracy of intelligence received.
Thirdly, actionable insights and better decision-making can occur more broadly when CT is employed properly during IA. The failure to employ hypothetical reasoning can have catastrophic consequences, as demonstrated by the fall of Singapore in February 1942, where a lack of imagination led to an inadequate defence, demonstrating the requirement for effective hypothetical reasoning as a part of CT. CT also aids in the creation of effective strategies as they are often contingent on accurate intelligence, with CT playing a crucial role in shaping informed decisions at the strategic level. This use of CT can be seen in the US development of red teaming. In the days after the 9/11 attacks, the CIA formed a group of contrarian thinkers called the Red Cell designed to “challenge the conventional thinking within the intelligence community and mitigate the threat of additional strategic surprises through the use of alternative analysis.” Consequently, it can be seen that CT allows for a higher number of actionable insights and allows for better decision-making, both being crucial in IA
However, challenges and limitations do arise when looking at CT within IA, with CT possibly hampering situations with a time constraint present or when situations are highly fluid, requiring dynamic action. If an analyst’s understanding of events is too greatly influenced by a singular mindset or model, their CT ability could be greatly impacted, especially when working within the context of a large, bureaucratic organisation. Despite this, however, mitigation can be taken to minimise the aforementioned issues, with continuous training programs and interdisciplinary collaboration being strategies which can be employed to enhance CT skills. This includes techniques such as using a numerical scale in conjunction with the PMESII-PT, allowing for an effective application of CT to a challenging phenomenon. Therefore it can be argued that despite possible limitations that come with CT, the ability to mitigate against the majority of these and the undeniable benefit of CT mean that it ultimately is a fundamental skill in IA.
In conclusion, CT is a paramount skill, essential for intelligence analysts in the twenty-first century, with the widespread proliferation of false, misleading, and ambiguous information. When employed directly by practitioners, the ability to ensure Objectivity and Accuracy, as well as the provision of actionable insights, cannot be understated. Without CT, pieces of otherwise useful Intelligence could be overlooked or misused, and whilst CT can in some cases increase the time it takes to use intelligence, it is ultimately beneficial to employ CT in the process of IA, with CT aiding in ensuring the integrity, reliability, and efficacy of IA. Therefore one can argue that CT within IA is a fundamental skill, with it being a foundation from which successful IA can be conducted.
Bibliography
Moore, David Thornton. “Critical Thinking and Intelligence Analysis.” National Defense Intelligence College, March 2007.https://doi.org/10.1037/e509522010-001.
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA481702.pdf
Marrin, Stephen. Improving intelligence analysis: Bridging the gap between scholarship and practice. Routledge, 2012.
Bar-Joseph, Uri, and Jack S. Levy. "Conscious action and intelligence failure." Political Science Quarterly 124, no. 3 (2009): 468.
Drogin, Bob. "Determining the Reliability of a Key CIA Source". Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard University, 2008
Butterfield, Alexander P., Jr, The Accuracy of Intelligence Assessment: Bias, Perception, and Judgement in Analysis and Decision, NAVAL WAR COLL NEWPORT RI 1993
Brian Farrell & Sandy Hunter (eds.), Sixty years on: the fall of Singapore revisited, Eastern Universities Press, Singapore, 2002
Landry, Thomas. "Embracing the devil: An analysis of the formal adoption of red teaming in the security planning for major events." Homeland Security Affairs (2017).
Heuer, Richards J. Psychology of intelligence analysis. Center for the Study of Intelligence, 1999. 6
Hess, James, and Curtis R. Friedel. “Applying Critical Thinking to Intelligence Analysis.” American Intelligence Journal26, no. 1 (2008): 31–44. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44327212.
Marangione, Margaret S. “What’s Thinking Got To Do With It? The Challenge of Evaluating and Testing Critical Thinking in Potential Intelligence Analysts.” Global Security and Intelligence Studies 5, no. 1 (January 1, 2020). https://doi.org/10.18278/gsis.5.1.6.