Boosting intelligence analysts’ judgment accuracy: What works, what fails?
A routine part of intelligence analysis is judging the probability of alternative hypotheses given available evidence. Intelligence organizations advise analysts to use intelligence-tradecraft methods such as Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH) to improve judgment, but such methods have not been...
Main Authors: | David R. Mandel, Christopher W. Karvetski, Mandeep K. Dhami |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Society for Judgment and Decision Making
2018-11-01
|
Series: | Judgment and Decision Making |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://journal.sjdm.org/18/18803/jdm18803.pdf |
Similar Items
Similar Items
-
Repeated judgment sampling: Boundaries
by: Johannes Muller-Trede
Published: (2011-06-01) -
A cautionary note on global recalibration
by: Joseph B. Kadane, et al.
Published: (2013-01-01) -
Coherence of
probability judgments from uncertain evidence: Does ACH help?
by: Christopher W. Karvetski, et al.
Published: (2020-11-01) -
Developing expert
political judgment: The impact of training and practice on judgmental accuracy
in geopolitical forecasting tournaments
by: Welton Chang, et al.
Published: (2016-09-01) -
Instruction in Information Structuring Improves Bayesian Judgment in Intelligence Analysts
by: David R. Mandel
Published: (2015-04-01)