CIA Analyst Training Handbook (2000) [pdf]

by Richards J. Heuer, Jr.

https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intellig...

This volume pulls together and republishes, with some editing, updating, and additions, articles written during 1978-86 for internal use within the CIA Directorate of Intelligence. The information is relatively timeless and still relevant to the never-ending quest for better analysis. The articles are based on reviewing cognitive psychology literature concerning how people process information to make judgments on incomplete and ambiguous information. Richard Heur has selected the experiments and findings that seem most relevant to intelligence analysis and most in need of communication to intelligence analysts. He then translates the technical reports into language that intelligence analysts can understand and interpreted the relevance of these findings to the problems intelligence analysts face.

Also, be wary of any word with more than three syllables.

Best part I found were some sentences an editor had yanked out. Here are a couple (editor comments in parens):

"Production units that grow food." (Farms?)

"Inhabitants of food-deficient countries." (Hungry people?)

EDIT: *had yanked out of various analyst drafts

The main distinction is all of the examples casually relate to activity the CIA may be involved in:

- elections - terrorist plots

https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intellig...

"And we are not historians"

No shit.

for example:

If you enter a room, identify the tallest and shortest people, the number of exits, their dimensions, and utilize any reflective surfaces to make this possible without dying.

It seems an analyst is a paper-pusher.

"We do not pile up detail. Data dumps are not the way to show our expertise."