Critical thinking is an essential tool for any investigator. Whether you are a Security Professional, Lawyer, Public Safety Specialist, Private Investigator, or Criminal Justice Practitioner, this course will teach you how to consistently apply critical thing and logical reasoning to effectively, and unbiasedly, assess information and their sources.

Perhaps the most common and sometimes costly mistakes made in any decision, is acting on faulty or incomplete information. Whether due to an over reliance on gut instinct and intuition, or as a result of unintended bias, the outcome are often surprisingly poor.

I first learn the criticality of effective data assessment as a cruel investigator where I discovered that taking time to properly assess the data before acting on it save time effort and resources down the line. Later as a university professor I had to really learn these lessons and in doing so I rediscovered the value of data assessment as a result. I have been able to enhance my expertise in research and in teaching. When I applied these time-tested reliable techniques and now you can to begin with. It's important to keep in mind two essential truths.

First all data sources have limits.

So, trying to "Swiss Army Knife" information is always a mistake simply because a piece of information valid in one instance and under one circumstance, does not mean it should be extrapolated to mean more. Without additional confirmation it is like viewing a house from the front without looking at the sides or the back. You only get one perspective right or wrong, it is still only one perspective. The more you see the clearer your perspective, and the better able you are to make the best decisions.

Remember all data has a shelf life.

Outdated and expired data is used as historical reference. It can contribute to assessing the reliability. However, acting on old data is one of the most common and sometimes costly mistakes one can make. Instead historical information should be used as intended, as a lens through which current data can be viewed. With this understanding in mind you can quickly see that there is a clock on the data.

Next we will add some straight line logic to help you avoid making unsupported, bias or incorrect decisions.

In this course you'll learn:

• What Bias is and how to minimize its influence

• What is the Source reliability flow and how to conduct a Source Reliability Assessment

• What is the Information Credibility flow and how to conduct an Information Credibility Assessment

• How Source Reliability and Information Credibility work together to create valid and unbiased assessments

In a Psychology Today article, Dr. Kelly Turner, an oncologist noted our brains have two, very different “operating systems.” 

System 1 is our quick, instinctual, and often subconscious way of operating – it is controlled by our right brain where our “limbic” and reptilian” parts of our brain have been in place since prehistoric times. It’s also this area of the brain that engages our emotions and feelings, and allows us to make intuitive decisions that are often spot on. You might know someone who’s good at ‘reading’ people, even if they can’t explain to you how or why. Often this is their right brain at work. Some trigger words they might use include words like, trust, comfortable, safe, guilty, wary, etc., e.g. “I’m not sure I’d trust that person, or something about this doesn’t feel right."

System 2 is our slower, more analytical, and conscious way of operating – it is controlled by our left brain and by newer parts of our brain that have only developed since prehistoric times (also known as the “neocortex”). It’s here that the rational, logical, evidence-based thinking, takes place and we try to make sense of and rely on facts, rather than feelings.

This is when straight-line logic comes into play in our decision-making, when there are no other relative factors to be considered. 

Regardless of your title or position, you know the value of a reliable source and credible information. More importantly you know that having one without the other diminishes the strength and value of your assessment, because you really only have ½ of the answer.

The systematic method you’re about to learn will permit you to assess both the source and the information in an unbiased manner.

Recognizing our bias is important to being able to manage and reduce them. Start with this short exercise - read the statement and make your answer selection, then continue.

The purpose of this exercise was to help visualize our conformation bias.

If you selected the A, 4, card combination to turn over, then congratulations! You're like most people who complete this exercise for the first time! It's very natural for us to look for a “right answer.”  
Although the likelihood that the A, 4 card combination could confirm the statement (give the right answer) is theoretically the same as the Q,7 card combination. However, confirming a statement to be true doesn’t teach us anything new!
Put another way, it’s okay to “know that you know, what you know., but that isn’t how to increase or add knowledge.

The better choice would be to turn over the Q, 7 card combination. If an even number is on the other side of the Q card or a vowel is on the other side of the 7 then the statement is false.  This actually tests the statement, rather than confirms it.

In general, bias can be defined a tendency to believe that some sources (persons, people, groups etc.,) are more reliable than others. As a result of bias we might not give the same degree of consideration to whatever information a source might share, and in some cases our bias might cause us to discount the information all together.

What’s also interesting is that there are actually three different types of bias at work in us at any given time.

Confirmation bias, or selective discretion, is when we subconsciously seek and interpret information and other evidence in ways that affirm or confirm our existing beliefs, ideas, expectations, or hypotheses. Confirmation bias is both affected by and feeds into our implicit biases, however, people can work to combat and change these biases.

Explicit bias refers to attitudes and beliefs (positive or negative) that we consciously or deliberately hold and express about persons, people, or groups. Explicit and Implicit biases can sometimes contradict each other; e.g. “I know what I know and my decision won’t be changed by facts.”

Implicit bias includes attitudes and beliefs (positive or negative) about persons, people, or groups that occur outside of our conscious awareness and control, and affect our opinions and behavior. Everyone has implicit biases—even people who try to remain objective (e.g., judges, journalists, investigators, etc.,) These biases tend to develop over a lifetime.

Consider this well known social experiment where a poorly dressed and groomed individual jay-walked across a street from within a crowd. No one followed him.
A short time later, the same individual, now smartly dressed and groomed jay-walked across the same street, and was immediately followed by several other people. The main difference was the bias perception we ascribe to well dress, well groomed persons, as opposed to poorly dress and poorly groomed.

So how do we fix our biasedness? “Motivation to be fair makes a difference.”

As with most things, the process – and it is a process, one that does not end – begins with education. 

Education begins with aware of your bias and being intentional about addressing it and mindful not to dismiss it as an unfix-able fault. Understand intuition and implicit responses are valuable, but some decisions require a more explicit kind of thinking, a response, rather than a reaction. Gather more information, and make it a practice to consciously consider other perspectives or possibilities before making a determination.

Exposure requires us to become less biased through increased social contact, and by actively searching for positive interactions with people groups in diverse environments. If you only encounter individuals when looking for information, your view of them will calcify. There are obvious boundaries, but exposure in other environments allows for divers perspectives.

Approach, as with education, requires critically thinking and considering the source, the event, and the environment. You can also reduce your cognitive load by not trying to multi-task, or task switch on the fly. Instead, be present in the moment. Don't allow your current event or perspective to be tainted by what happened last time, or yesterday, with someone else, or someplace else. Remember New day = new opportunity.

Checklists at key decision points can reduce unintentional bias and also reduce your cognitive load by providing an objective framework to assess your thinking.

Einstein is credited with saying “insanity is doing the same thing again and again and expecting different results.” The fact is “If you always did what you’ve always done, then you’ll always get, what you’ve always gotten…even if it isn’t what you wanted.” So examine your procedures and make changes that make sense. 

A simple formula to remember when considering probability is,

“The higher the degree of Reliability and Credibility, the higher Probability that the information provided is valid.”

An abandoned building was reported to be on fire around 11pm. The fire department responded and put the fire out. The following statements regarding the fire were reported through various sources. Which was most likely the most accurate?

Note that once the source of the statements are attached to the statements themselves, the rational becomes even more clear. However, even without the source identity, the statements themselves provide clues as to which was most likely to be the most accurate.

This brings us to another important point.

Internal sources are typically the best sources – and provide the most reliable information.

The rationale is simple – internally vetted sources must undergo some degree of verification prior to being recorded.

And they generally have nothing to gain by fabricating information and everything to lose.

Some internal sources might include Crime scene sketches are validated

Dispatch sheets are recorded

Evidence is logged in, etc.,

These sources have no inherent reason for deception – that said, wouldn’t it be great to have a pocket polygraph?

Throughout this course we’ve focused on our biases and methods for overcoming them. The next thing to focus on is assessing the source of the information. This source reliability flow is a great way to step through the process. Remember every reliable assessment starts with the source of the information.

The first step is to consider the relationship of the source to the information. How did they get it? Why did they get it? And why are they giving it to you?
Knowing the underlying motivation of a source to provide information will aid in assessing their reliability. 
Some common motivations might include, money, fear, revenge, indignation, or whistle-blower – and there are definite downsides to each.

-The downside to money as a motivator is that a source who’s motivated by money is susceptible to shop their information around for better compensation (highest bidder). It’s truly a mercenary type of arrangement. As long as you pay them well enough, they will work for you.
-The downside fear as a motivator is that once the fear is neutralized or removed, there is little incentive for a source to continue to work for you.

-The downside of a source who’s motivated by revenge, or indignation, is that these are both highly emotional responses, and as such are nearly impossible to maintain long term. A source may say or do something in the heat of the moment that they regret or recant later on after their emotions settle, often resulting in them ending their working arrangement with you with little or no notice. 

This is a good time to point out that regardless how long you’ve known the source, or how closely you’ve worked together, you should remember that they don’t owe you any loyalty. 99% of all sources are only concerned about themselves.
If they’re willing to compromise themselves for you, don’t be shocked to learn that they’re willing to compromise you…or anyone else to get what they want. 
-The possible exception may be the whistle-blower, who becomes a source for personal ethical reasons. The downside is a whistle-blower typically has time-sensitive access to information and is not often considered a long-term source.   

Regardless of the motivation of the source  Don’t get complacent. Understand that their motivations often change, and you need to stay alert and continuously validate them.

• Trust or trustworthiness – what is their history of trust worthiness?
• Authenticity – this is defined as being legitimate with you in their actions and their conversation. Do you have to ‘grill’ your source for information, or do they volunteer it – even when it puts them in a poor light?
• Competence – simply put, if you direct a source to collect information do they require step by step instructions, or are they able to perform without being micromanaged? 

Once these three main characteristics have been considered, then you have a firm foundation regarding the source’s reliability. It’s also worth noting that, like the relationship of the source to the information, the source characteristics must be regularly assessed as they may change.

Review the Source Reliability Assessment rubric.

Note that the rubric is based on alpha characters similar to what you might find in an academic setting,  with 'A' representing the highest level of reliability and 'F' representing the lowest, as unable to judge.

The explanations that accompany each rating should be used to guide the rating the source – all the time.

Let’s apply it to the following scenario...

While investigating a series of car break-ins over the past few weeks, you inform your sources to be on the lookout for information regarding the identity of the perpetrator(s), or the location of the stolen property. 

Your source, Jody Mets, reported that some of the stolen property was being sold online by a pawn shop dealer. Jody said while looking for a drone copter the pawn shop dealer showed her one with the same markings as one you said was stolen, and added that he usually sells this sort of property online, but he’d give her a deal.

Jody has been your source for about a month and this is the first time she’s provided you with any information.

After considering the source relationship to the information as well as her characteristics, the most logical (unbiased) assessment that can be reached is F, since there is No basis on which to judge the source; simply because the source has no previous history of providing information.

What this essentially means is that you will need to use additional methods to assess this source’s reliability. 

The Information credibility assessment rubric follows a simple numeric grading method.

1 – indicating the information was confirmed by other sources, making it the most credible information

6 – unable to judge due to no basis for evaluating the information 

Let’s continue with the scenario –

Based on information you received from your source you conducted a background check on the pawn shop owner, which did not reveal any criminal history. You then direct a second (2nd) confidential source to the pawn shop to look for evidence of stolen property. The 2nd source confirmed there was a drone in the shop, but stated they were unable to check it out without arousing suspicion.

Based on what you now know, is there enough information to consider further investigative effort?

• Was the information confirmed by an independent source? 
• What additional actions can you take to triangulate the credibility of the information? 
• Based on your investigative effort, how would you rate the credibility of the information? 

When the characteristics of the information are evaluated using the rubric, the logical (unbiased) assessment is 1 as the information was Confirmed - at least in part - by other sources, and is logical in itself.

Keep in mind that triangulating the information is the best way to improve credibility

Here’s what the Source Reliability and the Information Credibility flow look like when combined - notice the connectivity between each element.

When combined, the Source Reliability and Information Credibility flow, provide a complete assessment process.    

Although both assessments are done independent of each other, when you combine the results of a Source Reliability Assessment with the Information Credibility Assessment, you create a type of synergy that produces a clear, unbiased, and valid assessment you can act on.   

A common question is whether or not this process should be used for every report? The short answer is yes – and realize that as you apply these assessments to sources and information over time, the reliability of the source and the credibility of the information will improve.

You’ll be better able to quickly establish reliable sources and determine the credibility of information, - and just like any other critical thinking muscle, the more you use it, the better you will become.

(Be sure to download the Analytic Investigative Inquiry Guide to Online Resources)

This is an introduction to Open-source intelligence or OSINT, as another resource investigators can use to gather information in their investigative inquiry.

Before diving into examples of OSINT it’s worthwhile to understand what, it is. The U.S. Army Field Manual Intermediate 2-22-9 (2008) explains how OSINT is produced, and how it is used more so than what it is.

The key phrase within this explanation which might be considered defining it, is “publicly available.” Publicly available information typically can be found through a variety of sources – most commonly, social media, and public facing web pages and information in the public domain.

In terms of OSINT think of it as the difference between a public book exchange – and a public library. Both contain information, but one has few controls on access whereas the other requires some level of user authentication to gain access.

Most of the OSINT data is collected online, and there are a lot of them! Too many to discuss in this brief overview, but here are a few.

One resource is The Wayback Machine. For anyone old enough to remember the Peabody and Sherman cartoon, the concept is similar. Content published online is temporary, so for that reason seasoned OSINT investigators always record any information uncovered through the course of an investigation because it might be deleted or removed the next time they visit the site.

Thankfully, that’s where the Wayback Machine can come in handy.

This digital archive service takes screenshots of websites on a regular basis. This allows investigators to see how a page looked at various points in time.

And since launching in 1995, it has cached over 625 billion web pages in addition to millions of videos, audio recordings, and software programs.

Proper research can reveal information that may no longer be available online or findable through regular search engines.

This search engine allows users to monitor mentions of key terms across social media. That enables OSINT analysts to quickly measure and track what people are saying about an executive, brand, or location in one place.

To be clear, tools designed for marketers, like Social Searcher, social mention and the like do have certain limitations.

For instance, the site only scans a handful of the largest, most popular platforms.

Pictures make up the bulk of content on the web. For that reason, conducting a reverse image search often come in handy for when conducting OSINT research.

Tin Eye is a Canadian-based image-focused web crawling database.

The application allows users to search by image and figure out where else it may have been published online. This can be done by uploading an image to TinEye or searching by URL.

This is a good resource to consider when trying to identify a person of interest, determine an area where a photo was taken, or challenge online mis- and disinformation circulating online.

Viewing the EXIF data (Exchangeable File Format metadata) in your photos can be done with several different by similar tools.

EXIF Viewer - is a Google Chrome extension

EXIF.Tools - is an online resource that allows you to upload an image on the site and retrieve metadata.

Similar EXIF data viewers perform similar action - and yield similar results.

Whatever metadata is captured by the digital camera and stored or embedded into the image can be retrieved by most EXIF tools.

The information typically includes:

File Name

Date/Time of Image Capture

Date/Time Image was last accessed

Furthermore – the EXIF could reveal GPS data in Latitude and Longitude of where the camera was located when the image was captured. Entering the Long/Lat data of the photo's location into a mapping website can provide you with a map location for the site. It is also important to note that the better the GPS coordinates, the more precise the location of where the camera was located when the photograph was captured.

Here is what the GPA coordinates look like on a map - and what the map looks like when you zoom in. The takeaway is to remember that the more precise the GPS coordinates, the more precise the mapping location.

In Summary: A source reported stolen property is being sold online by a local pawn shop. You assessed the source and the information.
In Conclusion: You determined that although the Source has no history of providing information, the Information itself was partially confirmed and appeared logical in itself. You assessed the report (F,1), and based on your assessment, the pawn shop was targeted for further investigation.

The final step in the process is to record the results of your assessments. At some point in the future you may have need to review, or justify some of the decisions you made in your investigation. When you have the results of your assessments recorded, whether on a separate file, computer program, or on the corner of a document itself, you’ll be able to clearly explain the logic behind your reasoning

Thank you for participating in the Fundamentals of Analytical Investigations: Effective Data Assessment Training. 

In this course you learned: 

• What Bias is, and how to minimize its influence in your investigations
• What the Source reliability flow is and how to conduct a source reliability assessment
• What the information credibility flow is and how to conduct an information credibility assessment
• And finally, how Source Reliability and Information Credibility work together to create valid and unbiased assessments

If you found this training valuable, I would appreciate your review (assessment) of this course. 
Specifically anything that you felt was done well, or any thing you felt could use improvement. 
I read and respond to all reviews. and thank you in advance for them.

Best wishes and good luck on your investigations!

In this course you learned Why we gravitate to instinct over evidence when making assessments.

You learned the basics about the three types of Bias; confirmation, Explicit, and Implicit

You also learned three ways to minimize their influence to your assessments and decision-making

You then learned about the Source Reliability Flow and the importance of the relationship of the source to the information as well as How to conduct a Source Reliability Assessment using the matrix

You were introduced to the Information Credibility flow, and how to triangulate sources to enhance the credibility of the information, and you also learned How to conduct an Information Credibility Assessment using the matrix

And finally, you discovered how Source Reliability and Information Credibility work together to create valid and unbiased assessments. 

I hope you found this training valuable and use it in all your investigations, and I appreciate your review (assessment) of this course.

Specifically anything that you felt was done well, or anything you felt could use improvement.

I read and respond to all reviews in an effort to provide the best training possible, so I thank you in advance for sharing your insights with me.

Best wishes and good luck on your investigations!