The efficacy of ACH in mitigating serial position effects and confirmation bias in an intelligence analysis scenario

Bibliography

• Anderson, N. H. “Test of a Model for Number Averaging Behaviour.” Psychonomic Science 1 (1964): 191–192. doi:10.3758/BF03342858.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, N. H. “Primacy Effects in Personality Impression Formation Using a Generalized Order Effect Paradigm.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2, no. 1 (1965b): 1–9. doi:10.1037/h0021966.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, N. H. “Application of a Weighted Average Model to a Psychological Averaging Task.” Psychonomic Science 8, no. 6 (1967): 227–228. doi:10.3758/BF03331634.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, N. H. “Information Integration Theory Applied to Attitudes about US Presidents.” Journal of Educational Psychology 84, no. 1 (1973a): 1–8. doi:10.1037/h0033874.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, N. H., and A. A. Barrios. “Primacy Effects in Personality Formation.” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 63, no. 2 (1961): 346–360.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asch, S. E. “Forming Impressions of Personality.” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 41 (1946): 258–290. doi:10.1037/h0055756.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cabinet Office. Review of Intelligence on Weapons of Mass Destruction (Butler Review). London: Cabinet Office, 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Cabinet Office. Quick Wins for Busy Analysts, Professional Heads of Intelligence Analysis. London: Cabinet Office, 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Chapman, L., and J. Chapman. “Genesis of Popular but Erroneous Diagnostic Observations.” Journal of Abnormal Psychology 72 (1967): 193–204.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheikes, B. A., L. Adelman, M. J. Brown, and P. E. Lehner. Confirmation Bias in Complex Analyses. Bedford, Massachusetts: MITRE, Centre for Integrated Intelligence Systems, 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction. Report of the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction. Washington DC: United States Government, 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Criminal Intelligence Service Canada. Strategic Early Warning for Criminal Intelligence: Theoretical Framework and Sentinel Methodology. Canada: Criminal intelligence Service, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Drogin, R. Curveball: Spies, Lies and the Man behind Them: The Real Reason America Went to War in Iraq. London: Ebury Press, 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Evans, J., and B. T. St. “Reasoning, Bias and Dual Processes: The Lasting Impact of Wason (1960).” Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 69, no. 10 (2016): 2076–2092. doi:10.1080/17470218.2014.914547.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Folker, R. D. Intelligence Analysis in Theater Joint Intelligence Centers: An Experiment in Applying Structured Methods. Washington DC: Joint Military Intelligence College, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Frewer, L. J., D. Hedderley, C. Howard, and R. Shepherd. “What Determines Trust in Information about Food-Related Risks? Underlying Psychological Constructs.” Risk Analysis 16, no. 4 (1996): 343–353. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.1996.tb01094.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grabo, C. Handbook of Warning Intelligence: Assessing the Threat to National Security. edited by J. Goldman. Maryland: The Scarecrow Press Inc, Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Handel, M. “Intelligence and the Problem of Strategic Surprise.” Journal of Strategic Studies 7, no. 3 (1984): 229–281. doi:10.1080/01402398408437190.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hendrick, C., and A. F. Costantini. “Effects of Varying Trait Inconsistency and Response Requirements on the Primacy Effect in Impression Formation.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 15 (1970a): 158–164. doi:10.1037/h0029203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hendrick, C., and A. F. Costantini. “Number Averaging Behaviour: A Primacy Effect.” Psychonomic Science 19, no. 2 (1970b): 121–122. doi:10.3758/BF03337452.
   Google Scholar
• Hendrick, C., A. F. Costantini, K. McBride, and J. McGarry. “Attention Decrement, Temporal Variation, and the Primacy Effect in Impression Formation.” Memory and Cognition 1 (1973): 193–195. doi:10.3758/BF03198093.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heuer, R. J., Jr., and R. H. Pherson. Structured Analytical Methods for Intelligence Analysis. London: CQ Press/Sage Publishing, 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, L. K. National Security Intelligence. Cambridge: Polity, 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, N. “Critical Epistemology for the Analysis of Competing Hypotheses.” Intelligence and National Security (2017). doi:10.1080/02684527.2017.1395948.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jungermann, H., K. Fischer, and H.-R. Pfister. “Credibility, Information Preferences and Information Interests.” Risk Analysis 16, no. 2 (1996): 251–261. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.1995.tb00783.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kent, S. Strategic Intelligence for American World Policy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1949.
   Google Scholar
• Klahr, D., and K. Dunbar. “Dual Space Search during Scientific Reasoning.” Cognitive Science 12 (1988): 1–48. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1201_1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klayman, J., and Y.-W. Ha. “Confirmation, Disconfirmation, and Information in Hypothesis Testing.” Psychological Review 94 (1987): 211–228. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.94.2.211.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koslowski, B., and M. Maqueda. “What Is Confirmation Bias and When Do People Actually Have It?” Merrill-Palmer Quarterly 39, no. 1 (1993): 104–130.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krizan, L. Intelligence Essentials for Everyone. Washington DC: Joint Military Intelligence College, 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D., E. Amsel, and M. O’Loughlin. The Development of Scientific Thinking Skills. New York: Academic Press, 1988.
   Google Scholar
• Maxwell, S. E., and H. D. Delaney. Designing Experiments and Analysing Data: A Model Comparison Perspective (Volume 1). Taylor: and Francis Group: London, 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Mynatt, C. R., M. E. Doherty, and R. D. Tweney. “Confirmation Bias in a Simulated Research Environment: An Experimental Study of Scientific Influence.” Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 29, no. 1 (1977): 85–95. doi:10.1080/00335557743000053.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perrin, B. M., B. J. Barnett, J. D. Grossman, and R. Walrath. “Information Order and Outcome Framing: An Assessment of Judgement Bias in a Naturalistic Decision-Making Context.” Human Factors 43, no. 2 (2001): 227–238. doi:10.1518/001872001775900968.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters, R. G., V. T. Covello, and D. B. McCallum. “The Determinants of Trust and Credibility in Environmental Risk Communication: An Empirical Study.” Risk Analysis 17, no. 1 (1997): 43–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richards, J. The Art and Science of Intelligence Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Schwoebel, R. L. Explosion aboard the Iowa. Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, (1846) 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, C. Creating Strategic Visions. Pennsylvania: United States Army War College, Strategic Studies Institute, 1990.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, C. C. A Glimpse of Hell: The Explosion on the USS Iowa and Its Cover-Up. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Tolcott, M. A., P. E. Lehner, and F. F. Marvin. “Expert Decision-Making in Evolving Situations.” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 19, no. 3 (1989): 606–615. doi:10.1109/21.31066.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Treverton, G. F., and W. Fishbein. Making Sense of Transnational Threats. Washington D.C: Sherman Kent Center, 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Tversky, A., and D. Kahneman. “Judgement under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.” Science 185 (1974): 1124–1131. doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. Criminal Intelligence Manual for Analysts. New York: United Nations, 2011.
   Google Scholar
• United States Government. A Tradecraft Primer: Structured Analytical Methods for Improving Intelligence Analysis. Washington DC: Central Intelligence Agency, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Wason, P. C. “On the Failure to Eliminate Hypotheses in a Conceptual Task.” Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 12, no. 3 (1960): 129–140. doi:10.1080/17470216008416717.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wason, P. C. “On the Failure to Eliminate Hypotheses – A Second Look.” In Thinking and Reasoning, edited by P. C. Wason and P. N. Johnson-Laird, 165–174. Baltimore: Penguin, 1968.
   Google Scholar
• Whetherick, N. E. “Eliminative and Enumerative Behaviour in a Conceptual Task.” Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 14, no. 4 (1962): 246–249.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar