The "analysis of competing hypotheses" in intelligence analysis

The intelligence community uses ‘structured analytic techniques’ to help analysts think critically and avoid cognitive bias. However, little evidence exists of how techniques are applied and whether they are effective. We examined the use of the Analysis of Competing Hypotheses (ACH) – a technique designed to reduce ‘confirmation bias’. Fifty intelligence analysts were randomly assigned to use ACH or not when completing a hypothesis testing task that had probabilistic ground truth. Data on analysts’ judgment processes and conclusions was collected using written protocols that were then coded for statistical analyses. We found that ACH-trained analysts did not follow all of the steps of ACH. There was mixed evidence for ACH’s ability to reduce confirmation bias, and we observed that ACH may increase judgment inconsistency and error. It may be prudent for the intelligence community to consider the conditions under which ACH would prove useful, and to explore alternatives.

© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd and Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada Reproduced with the permission of the Minister of National Defence.
Published version: This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.