Knowledge externalization and intelligence paradigm

Tapalović, Željka. (2014). Knowledge externalization and intelligence paradigm. PhD Thesis. Filozofski fakultet u Zagrebu, Department of Information Science
Department of Information Science > Chair of knowledge organization.
(Poslijediplomski doktorski studij informacijskih i komunikacijskih znanosti) [mentor Lasić-Lazić, Jadranka].

Preview

PDF (Croatian) Download (5MB) | Preview

Abstract

This doctoral disertation has demonstrate the implications of cognitive scinences on intelligence analysis and the relationship between intelligence assessments and existing analytical paradigm. In intelligence practice that deals with the phenomena arising from a changeable and asymmetric security environment the appearance of systemic errors that arise from the traps inherent in the analyst himself, i.e. his biases and prejudices, is clear. A framework for understanding thinking pitfalls as a main cause of analytical pathologies is Herbert Simon's theory of bounded rationality; human being's mental capacity is limited so the decision maker is unable to directly deal with the complexities of the world. Decision maker is limited in two ways: in the way he recall information from memory and in a way he percive and understand information from the environment. In that sense intelligence analyst constructs a simplified mental model of reality, based on interaction between nature and nurture, i.e. his past experiences. So the mental model tells the analyst what to expect, what to look for and how to interpret the relations between phenomena. Intelligence analyst works with his mental model and behaves rationally within it. But the problem is that mental model is not always completely adopted to real world and it is ground for generating cognitive biases. Intelligence analysts are specially susceptible to: - selectivity bias - anchoring bias - confirmation bias - hindsight bias and - availability bias. In dealing with puzzles and mysteries of dynamic and asymmetric security environment in rapidly changing world, relying mindlessly on those mental models and solely intuitive thinking can have deadly consequences. Therefore, it is vitaly important that intelligence personel adopt and develop the habit of critical thinking. This involves an act in which the analyst, while considering his analysis (cognition), simultaneously thinks about the quality of the process used to reach his conclusion (metacognition). In this context, two equaly valuable goals appear: reaching valid decision and improving the quality of thinking and reasoning itself. In this way the possibility of systemic intelligence-analytical error as a cognitive miopy phenomena is reduced, in contrast to intelligence failure arising from paucity of information and/or a failure in its processing.On the other hand, a reliance on analytical techniques, i. e. structural analitical techniques (diagnostic tehniques, opposing tehniques, inovative thinking tehniques, etc), improve analytical thinking in a way that enables questioning one's analytical judgements, recognizing one's pre-established mind set, stimulating creativity and dealing with uncertanty. Third pillar for improving and curing analitical pathologies is understandin intelligence analyst as a knowledge worker in a knowledge organisation. The analysis phase of intelligence process becomes individual but also collaborative enterprise where collected information are analysed, synthesised and contextualised. The aim of the overall endeavour is creating actionable intelligence product with the added vallue as a result of cognitive and collaborative knowledge creation process of intelligence analysts. In that way intelligence organisation becomes complex adaptive biosocial system based on knowledge as the human capacity to take effective action in varied and uncertain situations.

Actions (login required)

View Item