From 081be4fcddbf510eaafd8f3af518ee7c7e794671 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Alexandre Dulaunoy <a@foo.be>
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 21:19:32 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] A first version of A series of assessment predicates
 describing the analyst capabilities to perform analysis or making judgments
 under a certain level of uncertainty. These assessment can be assigned by the
 analyst him/herself or by another party evaluating the analyst or the
 analysis.

This is based on various documents but especially those two documents:

- Psychology of Intelligence Analysis (Richards J. Heuer, Jr.)
- Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (Amos Tversky; Daniel Kahneman)

The challenge when doing such taxonomy is to describes a human process
into a machine-readable taxonomy. So feedback (via PR or issues)
is more than welcome.
---
 analyst-assessment/machinetag.json | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 83 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 analyst-assessment/machinetag.json

diff --git a/analyst-assessment/machinetag.json b/analyst-assessment/machinetag.json
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ad0f65f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/analyst-assessment/machinetag.json
@@ -0,0 +1,83 @@
+{
+  "namespace": "analyst-assessment",
+  "expanded": "Analyst (Self) Assessment",
+  "refs": [
+    "http://www.foo.be/docs/intelligence/Tversky_Kahneman_1974.pdf",
+    "http://www.foo.be/docs/intelligence/PsychofIntelNew.pdf"
+  ],
+  "description": "A series of assessment predicates describing the analyst capabilities to perform analysis or making judgments under a certain level of uncertainty. These assessment can be assigned by the analyst him/herself or by another party evaluating the analyst.",
+  "version": 1,
+  "predicates": [
+    {
+      "value": "experience",
+      "expanded": "Experience",
+      "description": "The analyst experience expressed in years range in the field tagged. The year range is based on a standard 40-hour work week."
+    },
+    {
+      "value": "alternative-points-of-view-process",
+      "expanded": "Alternative points of view process",
+      "description": "A list of procedures or practices which describe alternative points of view to validate or rate an analysis. The list describes techniques or methods which could reinforce the estimative language in a human analysis and/or challenge the assumptions to reduce the potential bias of the analysis introduced by the analyst(s)."
+    }
+  ],
+  "values": [
+    {
+      "predicate": "experience",
+      "entry": [
+        {
+          "numerical_value": 1,
+          "value": "less-than-1-year",
+          "expanded": "Less than 1 year"
+        },
+        {
+          "numerical_value": 2,
+          "value": "between-1-and-5-years",
+          "expanded": "Between 1 and 5 years"
+        },
+        {
+          "numerical_value": 3,
+          "value": "between-5-and-10-years",
+          "expanded": "Between 5 and 10 years"
+        },
+        {
+          "numerical_value": 4,
+          "value": "between-10-and-20-years",
+          "expanded": "Between 10 and 20 years"
+        },
+        {
+          "numerical_value": 5,
+          "value": "more-than-20-years",
+          "expanded": "More than 20 years"
+        }
+      ]
+    },
+    {
+      "predicate": "alternative-points-of-view-process",
+      "entry": [
+        {
+          "value": "analytic-debates-within-the-organisation",
+          "expanded": "analytic debates within the organisation"
+        },
+        {
+          "value": "devils-advocates-methodology",
+          "expanded": "Devil's advocates methodlogy"
+        },
+        {
+          "value": "competitive-analysis",
+          "expanded": "competitive analysis"
+        },
+        {
+          "value": "interdisciplinary-brainstorming",
+          "expanded": "interdisciplinary brainstorming"
+        },
+        {
+          "value": "intra-office-peer-review",
+          "expanded": "intra-office peer review"
+        },
+        {
+          "value": "outside-expertise-review",
+          "expanded": "Outside expertise review"
+        }
+      ]
+    }
+  ]
+}