Noncoercive human intelligence gathering

Abstract

Despite widespread recognition that coercive methods for intelligence gathering are unethical and counterproductive, there is an absence of empirical evidence for effective alternatives. We compared 2 noncoercive methods-the Modified Cognitive Interview (MCI) and Controlled Cognitive Engagement (CCE)-adapted for intelligence gathering by adding a moral frame to encourage interviewees to consciously consider sharing intelligence. Participants from the general population experienced an unexpected live event where equipment was damaged, and an argument ensued. Prior to interview, participants were incentivized to withhold information about a target individual implicated in the event. CCE yielded more target information more frequently than MCI (67% vs. 36%). Similarly, framing yielded target information more often (65% vs. 39%). The effects of interview and framing appear to be additive rather than interactive. Our results indicate combining noncoercive interview methods with moral framing can enhance intelligence gain.