The Mutual Support Function Model: A Cognitive Model for Intelligence Analysis Supporting Irregular Warfare

Abstract

Modern intelligence analysis has evolved due to the focus on Irregular Warfare (IW) and the proliferation of network-centric environments. Given the ubiquity of those two themes in modern intelligence analysis, this paper seeks to provide a detailed cognitive model of intelligence analysis for IW, the Mutual Support Function Model (MSFM), based on the original Support Function Model (SFM) for intelligence analysis from (Elm et al., 2005). In addition to the three functions of Down Collect, Conflict and Corroboration, and Hypothesis Exploration from the original SFM, the MSFM considers two additional functions, Information Needs Management and Decision Selection. In addition to presenting this theoretical model, this paper also presents a discussion of how the model may be applied to operational environments through the development of tools. We also discuss strategies for introducing associated technology to the work environment in a suitable manner.

Ordinal Structure of the Generic Analytic Workflow: A Survey of Intelligence Analysts

“…Indeed, others have similarly argued for the importance of including a capture requirements stage (called problem formulation or information needs management; [3][9]). Farry et al (2011) [3] also recommends including an end stage called decision selection which would be part of communicating conclusions. Pirolli and Card (2005) [8] interviewed two experienced intelligence analysts using a cognitive task analysis.…”

Supporting common ground across multiple operator perspectives - Creating collaborative solutions for distributed processing, exploitation, and dissemination (PED)

“…Furthermore, both the diversity and battle rhythm of modern operations have increased dramatically, causing customer's (and particularly Commander's) needs to change at a previously unseen rate. When combined, these factors lead to PED personnel spending increased time actively framing and contextualizing information related to new analytical tasks [4], experiencing attention narrowing from soda straw sensors that need to be manually exploited, and constantly reviewing their own workflows and new inputs to ensure that the information requirements they are addressing have not already been altered, shifted, answered, or overcome by other events. Common Ground or pieces of a Common Operating Picture between all stakeholders issuing, consuming, answering, or acting on PIRs is required to meet the challenges of the distributed, evolving, and expanding PED landscape [3].…”

Supporting Representation Management in Intelligence Analysis through Automated Decision Aids

“…Questions were developed and presented to participants in advance of the discussion. The in-person interviews centered around understanding the basic types of analytic products developed, common analyst workflows, and walkthroughs of a "typical" dayfrom building situation awareness, to monitoring/managing message traffic-and into deeper exploration of work challenges based on functions identified in previous CSE research (Woods, Patterson, & Roth, 2002;Elm, Potter, Tittle, Woods, Grossman, and Patterson, 2005;Trent, Woods, and Patterson, 2006;Trent, Voshell, and Patterson, 2007;Roth et al, 2010;Farry, Carlson, and Mahoney, 2011;Voshell et al, 2012).…”