Reference no: EM133328596
Question 1
In PIA, Heuer identifies four principles associated with the process of perception (perceiving what we expect to see; mindsets are quick to form but resistant to change; new information is assimilated into existing images; and ambiguous information interferes with accurate perception even when more and better information becomes available).
Of the four principles, (1) provide one personal or professional example of when you incorrectly perceived a situation; (2) identify the factors that contributed to misreading of the situation or event; and (3) a strategy (based on the assigned readings) you could have employed to fully perceive the event/situation.
Please note, all discussions are introspective in nature and are designed to share a personal or professional learning experience as it pertains to analysis-please have some fun with this post and feel free to have a laugh at your expense!
Question 2
In PIA, Heuer defines mirror imaging as "an example of an unavoidable cognitive trap" whereby the analyst fills in information gaps "by assuming that the other side is likely to act in a certain way because that is how the US would act under similar circumstances."
For this week's discussion, describe (1) a personal or professional instance in which you fell victim to mirror imaging; (2) identify the factors that contributed to misreading of the situation or event; and (3) a strategy that could have been employed to mitigate or prevent this particular case of mirror imaging from occurring.
In case you're wondering, most examples of mirror imaging tend to involve the opposite sex for as the title of the book reads "Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus." Again, have some fun with this assignment!
After you write your first post, respond to two classmates. First select a classmate who has no responses. If all classmates have at least one response, you may respond to any two.
Question 3
Class, this week I would like to discuss the value of structured methodologies. Although structured methodologies have been around for decades, I would like to know if any of you have ever used one and if so, for what problem set? In the event you haven't used structured methodologies, please provide your thoughts as to how valuable you think structured methodologies can be. Are there any specific problems sets you think they'd be particularly useful for or do you think their value is overstated?
For some of you, the ACH exercise is your first experience using a structured approach to critical thinking. If it is, do you think ACH is a valuable analytical tool and will you be able to use in the future (beyond the academic realm)?