網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

Sampling

Sampling may be used in conjunction with direct observation, document analysis, or interviewing. It is a demanding procedure, usually undertaken (or at least planned) by extensively trained professionals. An original essay on sampling is included in this section, in an attempt to present a brief, yet comprehensive picture of the major types of samples as well as common problems in sampling.

Content Analysis

Content analysis is a tool that has been refined and sophisticated for sociopolitical research over the years. It is now a powerful means of gathering information relevant to PSYOP. It can reveal the themes, appeals, and target audiences to which the psyoperator is directing his propaganda efforts, and it can also serve as a key indicator of enemy vulnerabilities, as seen by the enemy hierarchy. Content analysis also serves as a basis for counterpropaganda preparation. In spite of the sophistication of which content analysis is capable, it can also provide meaningful analyses without computerized support.

The papers in this section, then, illustrate but a few of the many possible methods of gathering and analyzing materials relevant to PSYOP intelligence needs.

METHODS FOR THE EXPLOITATION OF MAJOR PSYOP

INFORMATION SOURCES*

BY PHILLIP P. KATZ

A discussion of the variety of methods available for deriving useful PSYOP-relevant information from a diversity of sources.

This essay will discuss major PSYOP intelligence sources and relate them to PSYOP EEI and the techniques used for gathering data. Figure 1** illustrates the PSYOP intelligence process and program implementation. This section will discuss only the first two elements of the scheme -information source and data collection and testing (method). As Figure 2 indicates, the information source plus the data-gathering technique provide the answers to the EEI for PSYOP intelligence. Both will be discussed. In addition, this section will relate the information source to the PSYOP target, utilization, and the appropriate collecting agency. (See Figure 3).

PSYOP intelligence input data are obtained from published (reference) material and current data sources. Current data are obtained from primary and other sources. Primary information sources are: (1) prisoners of

*Original essay by Phillip P. Katz.

**Repeated from opening essay in this chapter for reader's convenience.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

*Content analysis of reports and evaluations provided by interrogators.

Figure 2. Techniques and Information Sources Used
to Obtain PSYOP Intelligence

*

*

*

CONTENT
ANALYSIS

*

*

[graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][merged small]

war, (2) defectors and refugees, (3) the friendly, neutral, and hostile civilian population, and (4) broadcast monitoring. A few of the other sources for PSYOP information are published and unpublished reports, captured documents, including enemy propaganda, newspapers and periodicals, and reports from other sources.

PRIMARY SOURCES

Prisoners of War

U.S. Army or other intelligence agencies are primarily responsible for the interrogation of prisoners of war. Such interrogation for PSYOP purposes requires that the individual interrogator have a reasonable

understanding of the communication process and the manner in which PSYOP media use prisoners in programing. Generally, this understanding of PSYOP media requirements cannot be obtained from a list of questions (EEI). In the PSYOP intelligence questioning some things cannot be asked directly, and it is necessary for the interrogator to understand the use of the information in PSYOP programing and work out his own method for eliciting the desired information accordingly. Most military intelligence interrogators have little or no training in PSYOP, because the primary focus of military intelligence as a collecting agency is on the conventional combat threat. EEI for military intelligence are primarily concerned with number and disposition of troops, types and location of weapons, enemy supply and logistics information, enemy morale, and order of battle.

Interrogation for PSYOP cannot be adequately accomplished mechanically; it requires human and empathic consideration. For example, in one instance in Vietnam, an NVA prisoner being interrogated at JUSPAO complained that he could not cooperate because he had severe headaches. He was give a medical examination and eyeglasses were prescribed. Subsequently, he became a lucrative source of information for PSYOP programs.

If meaningful PSYOP intelligence data are to be obtained from prisoners of war, more is needed than the aforementioned EEI checklist. The history of PSYOP since World War II clearly reveals that information has to be gathered chiefly by PSYOP interrogators who live in the prisonerof-war camps or detention centers. For example, in Europe during World War II, the intelligence section of the Psychological Warfare Division (PWD) of the Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force (SHAEF) had operational control of PSYOP prisoner-of-war interrogators and document analysts who were deployed in the field with the army groups and field armies. Moreover, soon after D-Day (the invasion. of Europe), special teams of PSYOP interrogators, operating directly under SHAEF PSYOP, conducted objective interrogations of prisoners for the purpose of studying the morale of enemy forces with a view to projecting trends in morale.

As far as can be determined, no specific format or EEI have been developed for PSYOP interrogation of prisoners or civilians in an insurgency environment. A suggested format for PSYOP interrogation of prisoners of war is the "Dicks-Shils Questionnaire #3 which was the basic interrogation form used by PWD/SHAEF interrogators during World War II. It employs, in part, the open-ended interview technique and is mostly concerned with tactical PSYOP. It is apparent that PSYOP interrogations for an insurgency environment require a different perspective and emphasis; and that a questionnaire developed in 1944 for World War II requires some change.

For the most part, PSYOP research during the Korean War concentrated on the use of interrogations and prisoner panels for testing leaflets.

« 上一頁繼續 »