Analytic Culture in the U.S. Intelligence Community (PDF) - CIA

More documents

Recommendations

Info

CHAPTER TWELVE The “File-Drawer” Problem and Calculation of Effect Size The file-drawer problem appears to have two causes: the reluctance of researchers to report their null results and the reluctance of professional journal editors to include studies whose results fail to reach statistical significance. Such studies remain in the “file-drawers” of the researchers. How much would these inaccessible studies affect the results of our meta-analysis? The answer seems to be not much. 1 Effect Size - Difference Between Two Means 1 Gene Glass, and Barry McGaw, “Choice of the Metric for Effect Size in Meta-Analysis”; Larry Hedges, “Estimation of Effect Size from a Series of Independent Experiments”; Larry Hedges and Ingram Olkin, “Vote-Counting Methods in Research Synthesis.” 129
CHAPTER TWELVE Effect size is usually defined as the difference between the means of two groups divided by the standard deviation of the control group ⎛ Χ−Χc ⎞ .2 ⎜ ∆= e ⎟ ⎝ σ c ⎠ Effect sizes calculated in this way estimate the difference between two group means measured in control group standard deviations as seen in the figure above. Glass et al. suggest that the choice of the denominator is critical and that choices other than the control group standard deviation are defensible. 3 However, they endorse the standard choice of using the control group standard deviation. Alternatively, Hedges and Olkin show that, for every effect size, both the bias and variance of its estimate are smaller when standard deviation is obtained by pooling the sample variance of two groups instead of using the control group standard deviation by itself. 4 An effect size based on a pooled standard deviation estimates the difference between two group means measured in standard deviations estimated for the full population from which both ⎛ Χe − Χc ⎞ experimental and control groups are drawn: ⎜ g = ⎟ , 5 where ⎝ S ⎠ 2 2 6 S is the pooled standard deviation: (Ne − 1)(Se ) + (Nc − 1)(Sc ) S = . e + N Nc − 2 Most commentators suggest that effect sizes can be treated as descriptive statistics and entered into standard tests for statistical significance. Hedges and Olkin have shown that the error variance around estimates of effect size is inversely proportional to the sample size of the studies from which the effect sizes are drawn. If the effect size in any review is drawn from studies employing widely different sample sizes, then the heterogeneity of variance among effect sizes prohibits their use in conventional t-tests, analyses of variance, and other inferential tests. This is the case in most of these reviews; therefore, effect sizes reported in this study are treated only with descriptive statistics. The effect sizes for computer-based training range from 0.20 to 0.46 depending on the population. 7 The effect size for distance instruction (television) is Control Mean, σc = Control Standard Deviation 3 Gene Glass, Barry McGaw and Mary Lee Smith, Meta-Analysis in Social Research. 4 Larry Hedges and Ingram Olkin, Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis. 5 g=Hedge's Effect Size, S=Hedge's Pooled Standard Deviation 6 Ne=Number of experimental subjects, Nc=Number of control subjects, Se=Standard deviation of experimental group, Sc=Standard deviation of control group 2 ∆=Glass's Effect Size, Χe = Experimental Mean, Χc = 130
Page 2 and 3:
All statements of fact, opinion, or
Page 4 and 5:
The Center for the Study of Intelli
Page 6 and 7:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are literall
Page 8 and 9:
CONTENTS Foreword by Gregory F. Tre
Page 10 and 11:
Part IV: Notes on Methodology Chapt
Page 12 and 13:
as “CNN plus secrets.” Johnston
Page 14 and 15:
INTRODUCTION ment, very open and ho
Page 16 and 17:
INTRODUCTION is so small and the se
Page 18 and 19:
INTRODUCTION gence analysts would u
Page 20 and 21:
INTRODUCTION I mention Mead not onl
Page 22 and 23:
eth•nog•ra•phy\n [F ethnograp
Page 24 and 25:
CHAPTER ONE Definition 1: Intellige
Page 26 and 27:
CHAPTER ONE that consumers of intel
Page 28 and 29:
CHAPTER ONE During the interviews f
Page 30 and 31:
CHAPTER TWO improvement infrastruct
Page 32 and 33:
CHAPTER TWO Secrecy vs. Efficacy se
Page 34 and 35:
CHAPTER TWO You know, someday someb
Page 36 and 37:
CHAPTER TWO Finding: Rewards and In
Page 38 and 39:
CHAPTER TWO distinction, for langua
Page 40 and 41:
CHAPTER TWO that analysis is not a
Page 42 and 43:
CHAPTER TWO described by participan
Page 44 and 45:
CHAPTER TWO instead of academic and
Page 46 and 47:
CHAPTER TWO Asked to define their p
Page 48 and 49:
CHAPTER TWO satisfaction and anxiet
Page 50 and 51:
PART II Ethnography of Analysis 31
Page 52 and 53:
CHAPTER THREE A Taxonomy of Intelli
Page 54 and 55:
A TAXONOMY OF INTELLIGENCE ing inte
Page 56 and 57:
A TAXONOMY OF INTELLIGENCE system t
Page 58 and 59:
A TAXONOMY OF INTELLIGENCE cases an
Page 60 and 61:
A TAXONOMY OF INTELLIGENCE Comparat
Page 62 and 63:
A TAXONOMY OF INTELLIGENCE has on t
Page 64 and 65:
CHAPTER FOUR Testing the Intelligen
Page 66 and 67:
TESTING THE INTELLIGENCE CYCLE Syst
Page 68 and 69:
TESTING THE INTELLIGENCE CYCLE an e
Page 70 and 71:
TESTING THE INTELLIGENCE CYCLE rela
Page 72 and 73:
TESTING THE INTELLIGENCE CYCLE ucts
Page 74 and 75:
TESTING THE INTELLIGENCE CYCLE the
Page 76 and 77:
TESTING THE INTELLIGENCE CYCLE shou
Page 78 and 79:
CHAPTER FIVE Integrating Methodolog
Page 80 and 81:
INTEGRATING METHODOLOGISTS ing ches
Page 82 and 83:
INTEGRATING METHODOLOGISTS good as,
Page 84 and 85:
INTEGRATING METHODOLOGISTS case sti
Page 86 and 87:
INTEGRATING METHODOLOGISTS cal infr
Page 88 and 89:
INTEGRATING METHODOLOGISTS Can Tech
Page 90 and 91:
INTEGRATING METHODOLOGISTS done to
Page 92 and 93:
CHAPTER SIX have different historie
Page 94 and 95: CHAPTER SIX As an observer, I misse
Page 96 and 97: CHAPTER SIX In contrast, 25 percent
Page 98 and 99: CHAPTER SIX numerous domain matter
Page 100 and 101: CHAPTER SIX Quite the contrary, eac
Page 102 and 103: CHAPTER SIX a practical matter, the
Page 104 and 105: CHAPTER SEVEN Background The argume
Page 106 and 107: CHAPTER SEVEN age about 30 percent,
Page 108 and 109: CHAPTER SEVEN the procedure’s app
Page 110 and 111: CHAPTER SEVEN includes the ability
Page 112 and 113: CHAPTER SEVEN advance beyond the co
Page 114 and 115: CHAPTER EIGHT is the process of lea
Page 116 and 117: CHAPTER EIGHT often be hired on the
Page 118 and 119: CHAPTER EIGHT Interestingly, resear
Page 120 and 121: CHAPTER EIGHT Conclusion and Recomm
Page 122 and 123: CHAPTER EIGHT research fellowships,
Page 124 and 125: CHAPTER NINE As the resources avail
Page 126 and 127: CHAPTER NINE For intelligence analy
Page 128 and 129: CHAPTER NINE analyses requires sign
Page 130 and 131: CHAPTER NINE Development and Valida
Page 132 and 133: CHAPTER NINE agents or agencies of
Page 134 and 135: CHAPTER TEN Survey Methodology This
Page 136 and 137: SURVEY METHODOLOGY content and, thu
Page 138 and 139: SURVEY METHODOLOGY might merely ser
Page 140 and 141: SURVEY METHODOLOGY group includes a
Page 142 and 143: CHAPTER ELEVEN Q-Sort Methodology O
Page 146 and 147: CHAPTER TWELVE 0.15 and for interac
Page 148 and 149: APPENDIX Jonathan Lockwood and K. L
Page 150 and 151: APPENDIX Hede Helfrich, “Human Re
Page 152 and 153: BIBLIOGRAPHY Published Sources Akin
Page 154 and 155: BIBLIOGRAPHY Camerer, Colin, and Er
Page 156 and 157: BIBLIOGRAPHY Endsley, M.R. “Desig
Page 158 and 159: BIBLIOGRAPHY Godson, Roy, ed. Compa
Page 160 and 161: BIBLIOGRAPHY Jervis, Robert. Percep
Page 162 and 163: BIBLIOGRAPHY ———, and Barbara
Page 164 and 165: BIBLIOGRAPHY Miller, George, and Ph
Page 166 and 167: BIBLIOGRAPHY ———. “The Pros
Page 168 and 169: BIBLIOGRAPHY Thompson, J. R., R. Ho
Page 170 and 171: BIBLIOGRAPHY Web resources Buros In
Page 172 and 173: sealed, world of intelligence. Rob
show all

Analytic Culture in the U.S. Intelligence Community (PDF) - CIA

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?