Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
Field Evaluation in the Intelligence and Counterintelligence Context: Workshop Summary Field Evaluation in the Intelligence and Counterintelligence Context Workshop Summary Robert Pool, Rapporteur Planning Committee on Field Evaluation of Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences-Based Methods and Tools for Intelligence and Counterintelligence Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS Washington, D.C. www.nap.edu
OCR for page R2
Field Evaluation in the Intelligence and Counterintelligence Context: Workshop Summary THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study was supported by Grant No. HHQI06-08-C-0010 between the National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Department of Defense. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-15016-3 International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-15016-7 Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu. Copyright 2010 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America Cover credit: Image in magnifying glass: U.S. Army 1st Lt. Michael Frank (center) of Charlie Company, 1st Battalion, 327th Infantry Regiment, questions a gasoline vendor along the main road next to Rashad, Iraq, during a patrol, May 23, 2006. U.S. Navy photo by Petty Officer 1st Class Jeremy L. Wood. Suggested citation: National Research Council. (2010). Field Evaluation in the Intelligence and Counterintelligence Context: Workshop Summary. Robert Pool, Rapporteur. Planning Committee on Field Evaluation of Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences-Based Methods and Tools for Intelligence and Counterintelligence. Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
OCR for page R3
Field Evaluation in the Intelligence and Counterintelligence Context: Workshop Summary THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org
OCR for page R4
Field Evaluation in the Intelligence and Counterintelligence Context: Workshop Summary This page intentionally left blank.
OCR for page R5
Field Evaluation in the Intelligence and Counterintelligence Context: Workshop Summary PLANNING COMMITTEE ON FIELD EVALUATION OF BEHAVIORAL AND COGNITIVE SCIENCES–BASED METHODS AND TOOLS FOR INTELLIGENCE AND COUNTERINTELLIGENCE Philip E. Rubin (Chair), Haskins Laboratories, Yale University Robert F. Boruch, Graduate School of Education and Statistics, University of Pennsylvania Robert A. Fein, Department of Psychiatry, McLean Hospital, Harvard Medical School Jonathan D. Moreno, Department of Medical Ethics and Department of History and Sociology of Science, University of Pennsylvania Eduardo Salas, Institute for Simulation and Training, University of Central Florida Neil Thomason, Department of History and Philosophy of Science (retired), University of Melbourne Carol H. Weiss, Graduate School of Education, Harvard University Bud Pautler, Study Director (through April 2009) Mary Ellen O’Connell, Study Director (from April 2009) Robert Pool, Rapporteur Renée L. Wilson Gaines, Senior Program Assistant
OCR for page R6
Field Evaluation in the Intelligence and Counterintelligence Context: Workshop Summary BOARD ON BEHAVIORAL, COGNITIVE, AND SENSORY SCIENCES Philip E. Rubin (Chair), Haskins Laboratories, Yale University Lisa Feldman Barrett, Department of Psychology, Boston College Linda Bartoshuk, College of Dentistry, University of Florida Richard Bonnie, Institute of Law, Psychiatry and Public Policy, University of Virginia Susan Carey, Department of Psychology, Harvard University Martin Fishbein, Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania Lila Gleitman, Department of Psychology (emeritus), University of Pennsylvania Michael Nacht, Goldman School of Public Policy, University of California, Berkeley Richard Nisbett, Department of Psychology, University of Michigan Valerie Reyna, Department of Human Development, Cornell University Richard Shiffrin, Psychology Department, Indiana University Brian Wandell, Department of Psychology, Stanford University J. Frank Yates, Judgment and Decision Laboratory, University of Michigan Barbara Wanchisen, Board Director Mary Ellen O’Connell, Associate Director Matthew McDonough, Senior Program Assistant
OCR for page R7
Field Evaluation in the Intelligence and Counterintelligence Context: Workshop Summary Acknowledgments This workshop summary is based on the discussion at a workshop convened by the Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences on September 22-23, 2009, and planned by the Committee on Field Evaluation of Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences-Based Methods and Tools for Intelligence and Counterintelligence. The planning committee members identified presenters, organized the agenda, made presentations, and facilitated discussion, although they did not participate in the writing of this report. This summary reflects their diligent efforts, the excellent presentations by other experts at the workshop, and the insightful comments of the many workshop participants. The workshop was sponsored by the Defense Intelligence Agency and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. The interest and support of Susan Brandon, chief for research, Behavioral Science Program DEO–Defense CI and HUMINT Center Defense Intelligence Agency, and Steven Rieber, research director, Office of Analytic Integrity and Standards, Office of the Director of National Intelligence, are much appreciated. This summary has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the Report Review Committee of the National Research Council. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential
OCR for page R8
Field Evaluation in the Intelligence and Counterintelligence Context: Workshop Summary to protect the integrity of the process. We thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Robert A. Fein, Department of Psychiatry, McLean Hospital, Harvard Medical School; Carl W. Ford, Jr., National Intelligence Council Associate, Office of the Director of National Intelligence; Leslie K. Goodyear, Division of Research on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings, National Science Foundation; Elizabeth F. Loftus, Departments of Psychology and Social Behavior and Criminology, Law and Society, University of California, Irvine; and Christian A. Meissner, Departments of Psychology and Criminal Justice, University of Texas, El Paso. Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the content of the report, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by John T. Monahan, School of Law, University of Virginia. Appointed by the National Research Council, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the author and the institution.
OCR for page R9
Field Evaluation in the Intelligence and Counterintelligence Context: Workshop Summary Contents 1 INTRODUCTION 1 The Behavioral Sciences and the Intelligence Community, 2 Urgency, 5 2 BEHAVIORAL TOOLS AND TECHNIQUES 9 Deception Detection, 9 Prediction Methods, 16 3 FIELD EVALUATION EXPERIENCES IN OTHER AREAS 27 Education, 27 Criminal Justice, 30 Health Sciences, 34 Legal System, 36 Human Factors, 41 Lessons, 45 4 EXPERIENCES IN OTHER COUNTRIES 49 A United Kingdom Perspective, 49 Canadian Defense Validation Efforts, 55 Discussion, 57 5 ETHICAL, REGULATORY, AND CULTURAL CONSIDERATIONS 59 Ethical Challenges of Translating Research into Effective Technologies, 59
OCR for page R10
Field Evaluation in the Intelligence and Counterintelligence Context: Workshop Summary Field Testing Versus Research, 65 Discussion, 67 6 LOOKING TO THE FUTURE 71 Obstacles to Field Evaluation, 71 Lessons for the Path Forward, 76 Implementation Issues, 81 REFERENCES 89 APPENDIXES A Workshop Agenda and Participants 91 B Relevant Readings 99