https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1036-2286
![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Acknowledgements
I thank Daniel Irwin for his feedback on an earlier draft of this article and his assistance with its preparation.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes
1. Mandel, “Applied Behavioural Science.”
2. Pool, Field Evaluation.
3. Coulthart, “From Laboratory to the WMD Commission.”
4. Ibid.
5. United States Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Intelligence Community Directive 203.
6. Heuer, Psychology of Intelligence Analysis.
7. United States Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Intelligence Community Directive 203; Central Intelligence Agency, A Tradecraft Primer.
8. Chang et al., “Restructuring Structured Analytic Techniques.”
9. Kahneman and Tversky, “Subjective Probability.”
10. See note 8 above.
11. Mandel and Barnes, “Accuracy of Forecasts”; and Mandel and Barnes, “Geopolitical Forecasting Skill.”
12. Chang and Tetlock, “Rethinking the Training of Intelligence Analysts.”
13. Marrin, “Training and Educating U.S. Intelligence Analysts.”
14. Mandel et al., “Boosting Intelligence Analysts’ Judgment Accuracy.”
15. Dhami et al., “The Analysis of Competing Hypotheses.”
16. Karvetski et al., “Improving Probability Judgment.”
17. Whitesmith, “The Efficacy of ACH.”
18. Mandel, “Can Decision Science Improve Intelligence Analysis?”
19. Nelson, “Finding Useful Questions”; and Crupi et al., “Generalized Information Theory”; for discussion in the context of intelligence collection, see Timms et al., “Applying Information Theory.”
20. Calls for increased scientific testing of analytic methods have been made, e.g., by Rieber and Thomason, “Creation of a National Institute”; Marrin, “Intelligence Analysis”; Dhami et al., “Improving Intelligence Analysis”; and Mandel and Tetlock, “Correcting Judgment Correctives.”
21. Scopelliti et al., “Bias Blind Spot.”
22. West et al., “Cognitive Sophistication.”
23. Heuer, email correspondence, 15 August 2010.
24. Feynman, “Cargo Cult Science.”
25. Nolte, “US Intelligence and its Future.”
26. Kerbel, “The U.S. Intelligence Community’s Kodak Moment.”
27. Coulthart, “From Laboratory to the WMD Commission,” 827.
28. Kent, “Estimates and Influence.”
29. For example, see Tetlock et al., “Forecasting Tournaments.”
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
David R. Mandel
David R. Mandel is a senior Defence Scientist with Defence Research and Development Canada and Adjunct Professor of Psychology at York University. He publishes widely in peer-reviewed journals and has five co-authored or co-edited books on the topics of reasoning, judgment, and decision-making. Mandel is Chairman of the NATO System Analysis and Studies Panel Research Technical Group on Assessment and Communication of Uncertainty in Intelligence to Support Decision Making (SAS-114) and Principal Investigator of multiple Canadian government projects aimed at improving intelligence production through the application of decision science.
