The good, the bad, and the tradecraft: HUMINT and the ethics of psychological manipulation

Bibliography

• Barnhill, Anne. “What is Manipulation?” in Manipulation. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Baron, Jonathan. “A Welfarist Approach to Manipulation.” Journal of Marketing Behavior 1, no. 3–4 (2016): 283–291.
   Google Scholar
• Beauchamp, Tom L., and James F. Childress. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Bellaby, Ross. “What’s the Harm? The Ethics of Intelligence Collection.” Intelligence and National Security 27, no. 1 (2012): 93–117.
   Google Scholar
• Bellaby, Ross. The Ethics of Intelligence: A New Framework. London: Routledge, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Brandon, Susan E., Simon Wells, and Colton Seale. “Science‐based Interviewing: Information Elicitation.” Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling 15, no. 2 (2018): 133–148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buss, David. “Manipulation in Close Relationships: Five Personality Factors in Interactional Context.” Journal of Personality 60, no. 2 (1992): 477–499.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cialdini, Robert. “Harnessing the Science of Persuasion.” Harvard Business Review 79, no. 9 (2001): 72–79.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cialdini, Robert., Petia K. Petrova, and Noah J. Goldstein. “The Hidden Costs of Organizational Dishonesty.” MIT Sloan Management Review 45, no. 3 (2004): 67–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, Robert. Intelligence Collection. Thousand Oakes: CQ Press, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Coons, Christian., and Michael Weber. Manipulation : Theory and Practice. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Faden, Ruth R., Tom L. Beauchamp, and Nancy M. P. King. A History and Theory of Informed Consent. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986.
   Google Scholar
• Frankena, William K. Ethics. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc, 1973.
   Google Scholar
• Gigerenzer, Gerd. “The Adaptive Toolbox: Toward a Darwinian Rationality.” In Evolutionary Psychology and Motivation, edited by J. A. French, A. C. Kamil, and D. W. Leger, pp. 113–143, University of Nebraska Press, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Godfrey, E. Drexel. “Ethics and Intelligence.” Foreign Affairs (New York, NY) 56, no. 3 (1978): 624–642.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodin, Robert. Manipulatory Politics. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1980.
   Google Scholar
• Hofer, Paul. “The Role of Manipulation in the Antisocial Personality.” International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 33, no. 2 (1989): 91–101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, Daniel., and Delroy L. Paulhus. “Introducing the Short Dark Triad (SD3) a Brief Measure of Dark Personality Traits.” Assessment 21, no. 1 (2014): 28–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahneman, Daniel. Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Kleinman, Steven. “KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation Review: Observations of an Interrogator.” Interrogation: Science and Art 209 (2006): 95–140.
   Google Scholar
• Lau, Stephan., and Anette Hiemisch. “Functional Freedom: A Psychological Model of Freedom in Decision-Making.” Behavioral Sciences 7, no. 4 (2017): 41. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs7030041.
   Google Scholar
• Malenka, David J., John A. Baron, Sarah Johansen, Jon W. Wahrenberger, and Jonathan M. Ross. “The Framing Effect of Relative and Absolute Risk.” Journal of General Internal Medicine 8, no. 10 (1993): 543–548. doi:10.1007/BF02599636.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mappes, Thomas A., and Jane S. Zembaty. Biomedical Ethics. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1991.
   Google Scholar
• McDermott, Rose. “Experimental Intelligence.” Intelligence and National Security 26, no. 1 (2011): 82–98.
   Google Scholar
• Meissner, Christian A., Frances Surmon-Böhr, Simon Oleszkiewicz, and Laurence J. Alison. ““Developing an Evidence-Based Perspective on Interrogation: A Review of the US Government’s High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group Research Program.” Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 23, no. 4 (2017): 438–457.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meslin, Eric M., Healther J. Sutherland, James V. Lavery, and James E. Till. “Principlism and the Ethical Appraisal of Clinical Trials.” Bioethics 9, no. 4 (1995): 399–418. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.1995.tb00314.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noggle, Robert. ”The Ethics of Manipulation.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by E. N. Zalta, Summer 2020. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2020/entries/ethics-manipulation/
   Google Scholar
• Nys, Thomas., and Bart Engelen. “Judging Nudging: Answering the Manipulation Objection.” Political Studies 65, no. 1 (2017): 199–214.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Omand, David. “The Ethical Limits We Should Place on Intelligence Gathering as Part of an Integrated CT Strategy.” Terrorism and Political Violence 33, no. 2 (2021): 290–301.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Omand, Sir David., and Mark Phythian. “Ethics and Intelligence: A Debate.” International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence 26, no. 1 (2013): 38–63.
   Google Scholar
• Omand, David., and Mark Phythian. Principled Spying : The Ethics of Secret Intelligence. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Patry, Philippe. Experimente Mit Menschen. Einführung in Die Ethik der Psychologischen Forschung. Bern: Huber, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Paulhus, Delroy., and Kevin M. Williams. “The Dark Triad of Personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and Psychopathy.” Journal of Research in Personality 36, no. 6 (2002): 556–563.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perry, D. L. Partly Cloudy : Ethics in War, Espionage, Covert Action, and Interrogation. Second ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Petty, Richard., and John T. Cacioppo. ”The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion.” In Chapter 1 in Communication and Persuasion, pp. 1–24. New York: Springer, 1986.
   Google Scholar
• Petty, Richard E., John T. Cacioppo, Alan J. Strathman, and Joseph R. Priester. “To Think or Not to Think: Exploring Two Routes to Persuasion.” In Persuasion: Psychological Insights and Perspectives, edited by T. C. Brock and M. C. Green, pp. 81–116, Sage Publications Inc, 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Powers, Penny. “Persuasion and Coercion: A Critical Review of Philosophical and Empirical Approaches.” HEC Forum : An Interdisciplinary Journal on Hospitals’ Ethical and Legal Issues 19, no. 2 (2007): 125–143.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Quinlan, Michael. “Just Intelligence: Prolegomena to an Ethical Theory.” Intelligence and National Security 22, no. 1 (2007): 1–13.
   Google Scholar
• Redlich, Allison D., Christopher E. Kelly, and Jeaneé C. Miller. “The Who, What, and Why of Human Intelligence Gathering: Self-Reported Measures of Interrogation Methods.” Applied Cognitive Psychology 28, no. 6 (2014): 817–828.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidt, Andreas., and Bart Engelen. “The Ethics of Nudging: An Overview.” Philosophy Compass 15, no. 4 (2020): e12658. doi:10.1111/phc3.12658.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skinner, Burrhus. “Contrived Reinforcement.” The Behavior Analyst 5, no. 1 (1982): 3–8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Slovic, Paul., Melissa L. Finucane, Ellen Peters, and Donald G. MacGregor. “). Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: Some Thoughts About Affect, Reason, Risk, and Rationality.” Risk Analysis: An International Journal 24, no. 2 (2004): 311–322.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sunstein, Cass. “Fifty Shades of Manipulation.” Journal of Marketing Behavior 1, no. 3–4 (2016): 213–244.
   Google Scholar
• Ware, Alan. “The Concept of Manipulation: Its Relation to Democracy and Power.” British Journal of Political Science 11, no. 2 (1981): 163–181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar