![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
This material is based upon work supported in whole or in part with funding from the Laboratory for Analytic Sciences (LAS). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the LAS and/or any agency or entity of the United States Government. We also acknowledge support of the Alan Turing Institute for the writing of this paper while Vogel was a Rutherford Fellow.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1. Office of the Director of National Intelligence, The AIM Initiative.
2. Ibid., iii.
3. Ibid., iv.
4. Ibid., v.
5. Ibid., 3.
6. Ibid., 8.
7. Pellerin, “Project Maven”; and Allen, “Project Maven.”
8. Wakabayashi and Shane, “Google Will Not Renew.”
9. DARPA; see also Ackerman, “Seeing Is Believing.”
10. Laboratory for Analytic Sciences, “2018 LAS Research Symposium.”
11. Laboratory for Analytic Sciences, “2019 LAS Collaborators Day.”
12. Office of the Director of National Intelligence, “IARPA Launches ‘MOSAIC’Program.”
13. Symon and Tarapore, “Defense Intelligence Analysis”; Hare and Coghill, “The Future of Intelligence”; Van Puyvelde et al., “Beyond the Buzzword”; Brantley, “When Everything Becomes Intelligence”; Shultz, “Post-9/11 Wartime Intelligence”; and Regens, “Augmenting Human Cognition.”
14. Masco, “Boundless Informant”; Lyons, Surveillance after Snowden; Aradau and Blanke, “The (Big) Data-Security”; Andrejevic and Gates, “Big Data Surveillance”; Greenwald, No Place to Hide; and Priest and Arkin, Top Secret America.
15. Crawford and Calo, “Blind Spot”; Cortada, The Digital Flood; Boyd and Crawford, “Critical Questions”; and Bijker, Hughes and Pinch, The Social Construction of Technological Systems.
16. Guest et al (2006) note that data saturation can be reached with as few as six interviews.
17. Bowen, “Naturalistic Inquiry”; and Fusch and Ness, “Are We There Yet?”
18. Dibley, “Analyzing Narrative Data.”
19. For some examples of this work, see Vogel, 2013; Vogel 2013/2014; Vogel and Knight, 2015; Vogel and Dennis, 2018; Vogel and Tyler, 2019; and Jameson, Tyler, Vogel, and Joines, 2020.
20. Buchalter, “Ideas in Science”; Crow and Wiles, “Managing Anonymity and Confidentiality”; and Thorne, “‘You Still Takin’ Notes?”
21. Wiles et al., “The Management of Confidentiality”; and Crow and Wiles, “Managing Anonymity and Confidentiality.”
22. For some examples, see: Nolan, “Ethnographic Research”; Eriksson, Swedish Military Intelligence; Vogel and Knight, 2015; Räsänen and Nyce, “The Raw is Cooked”; Nolan, “Information Sharing and Collaboration”; and Johnston, Analytic Culture.
23. Morris and Balmer, “Volunteer Human Subjects’ Understandings.”
24. For ethnographies of intelligence life, see Eriksson, Swedish Military Intelligence; Räsänen and Nyce, “The Raw is Cooked”; Nolan, “Ethnographic Research”; and Johnston, Analytic Culture.
25. The National Commission, The 9/11 Commission Report.
26. Duelfer, Comprehensive Report; Commission of the Intelligence Capabilities, Report to the President; and Kerr et al., “Issues for the U.S.”
27. Office of the Director of National Intelligence, “Civilian Workforce”; and Office of the Director of National Intelligence, “Senior Civilian Officers.”
28. Office of the Director of National Intelligence, “Vision 2015.”
29. Vogel, 2013; Stimson and Habeck, “Reforming Intelligence”; Johnston et al., “Transforming Defense Analysis”; Hackman, Collaborative Intelligence; Pherson and McIntyre, “The Essence of Collaboration”; Cooper, Curing Analytic Pathologies; Kerr et al., “Issues for the U.S.”; and Travers, “The Coming Intelligence Failure.”
30. See The President, “Executive Order 13526.”
31. Galison, “Removing Knowledge,” 237.
32. Toulmin, Human Understanding, Vol. 1, 142–143, 151.
33. Personal email communication with authors.
34. Treverton, New Tools for Collaboration; Nolan, “Information Sharing and Collaboration”; Vogel, 2013; Turnley and McNamara, “An Ethnographic Study”; and Cooper, Curing Analytic Pathologies.
35. Sinclair, “Thinking and Writing,” vii.
36. For this history, see Jervis, Why Intelligence Fails, 123–155.
37. Cooper, Curing Analytic Pathologies, 13.
38. See note 33 above.
39. Ibid.
40. Gentry, “Managers of Analysts”; Gannon “Managing Analysis”; Gentry, “Intelligence Analyst/Manager Relations”; Davis, “How Bad Things Happen”; and Hedly, “Learning from Intelligence Failures.”
41. Gentry, “Managers of Analysts,” 160.
42. Ibid., 156.
43. Cooper, Curing Analytic Pathologies, 11.
44. Ibid., 56.
45. Turnley and McNamara, “An Ethnographic Study.”
46. See note 33 above.
47. Cooper, Curing Analytic Pathologies, 56.
48. Ibid.
49. See note 33 above.
50. Medsker, “AI Transparency and Accountability.”
51. Vogel and Schmidt, 2021; Treverton, New Tools for Collaboration; and Yeh, “Case for Using Robots.”
52. See note 33 above.
53. Neff et al., “Critique and Contribute.”
54. Gillespie, “The Platform Metaphor.”
55. Friedman and Nissenbaum, “Bias in Computer Systems.”
56. Ibid.
57. U.S. Association for Computer Machinery; Caplan et al., Algorithmic Accountability; and Friedman and Nissenbaum, “Bias in Computer Systems.”
58. See note 53 above.
59. See U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, “Human Intelligence,” available at https://www.cia.gov/offices-of-cia/clandestine-service/intelligence.html.
60. Johnston, Analytic Culture, 17–18.
61. Heuer, Jr., The Psychology of Intelligence Analysis; and Davis, “Why Bad Things Happen.”
62. Mateescu and Nguyen, Algorithmic Management, 1.
63. See note 33 above.
64. Neff et al., “Critique and Contribute”; Fiore-Gartland and Neff, “Communication, Mediation”; and Taylor and Van Every, The Emergent Organization.
65. Mateescu and Nguyen, Algorithmic Management, 13.
66. See note 33 above.
67. Lee, “Understanding Perception.”
68. Moore and Piwek, “Regulating Wellbeing,” 7.
69. Schildt, “Big data,” 27.
70. Levy, “The Contexts of Control”; and Bowker and Star, Sorting Things Out.
71. Moore, The Quantified Self.
72. Levy, “The Contexts of Control”; Bernstein, “The Transparency Paradox”; and Ferneley et al., “Management Information or Trompe.”
73. Treverton, New Tools for Collaboration; and Fingar, “Building a Community.”
74. Ibid.
75. Neff et al., “Critique and Contribute,” 85.
76. Drupal, “Government Warning.”
77. Each U.S. intelligence agency sets its own requirements for types of evaluation and monitoring for security clearances; and, within each agency, workers may be subject to different types of evaluation and monitoring depending on the security clearances required to do the work.
78. Nissenbaum, Privacy in Context, 1–2,
79. Nissenbaum, Privacy in Context, 6.
80. Ibid., 132, 140–141.
81. Ibid., 166.
82. Amick and Smith, “Stress, Computer-Based Work Monitoring.”
83. Treverton, New Tools for Collaboration.
84. See note 33 above.
85. Zuboff, In the Age.
86. Westin, “Two Key Factors”; and Aiello and Kolb, “Electronic Performance Monitoring.”
87. Dourish, “Developing a Reflective Model.”
88. Schildt, “Big data,” 28.
89. See note 33 above.
90. Introna, “Workplace Surveillance.”
91. Crawford and Calo, “Blind Spot.”
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Kathleen M. Vogel
Dr Kathleen M. Vogel is Professor and Deputy Director at the School for the Future of Innovation in Society, Arizona State University. Her research focuses on the production of knowledge and big data in intelligence assessments. Her work has kept close engagement between academia, intelligence, and policy. She is author of Phantom Menace or Looming Danger?: A New Framework for Assessing Bioweapons Threats (Johns Hopkins University, 2013).
Gwendolynne Reid
Dr Gwendolynne Reid is an assistant professor of English and directs the writing program at Oxford College of Emory University. Her research examines writing in disciplinary and professional contexts and can be found in Science and Engineering Ethics, Written Communication, and Across the Disciplines, as well as several edited collections.
Christopher Kampe
Dr Chris Kampe is a Qualitative Researcher and Game Studies scholar
Paul Jones
Dr Paul Jones is an associate of the Laboratory for Analytic Sciences (LAS) in Raleigh, North Carolina. His main research interests are in data-driven methods for understanding human sensemaking processes, and in advancing human-machine collaborative intelligence