Advertisement

Exploring the Hybrid Space

Theoretical Framework Applying Cognitive Science in Military Cyberspace Operations
  • Øyvind Jøsok
  • Benjamin J. Knox
  • Kirsi Helkala
  • Ricardo G. Lugo
  • Stefan Sütterlin
  • Paul Ward
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9744)

Abstract

Operations in cyberspace are enabled by a digitized battlefield. The ability to control operations in cyberspace has become a central goal for defence forces. As a result, terms like cyber power, cyberspace operations and cyber deterrence have begun to emerge in military literature in an effort to describe and highlight the importance of related activities. Future military personnel, in all branches, will encounter the raised complexity of joint military operations with cyber as the key enabler. The constant change and complexity raises the demands for the structure and content of education and training. This interdisciplinary contribution discusses the need for a better understanding of the relationships between cyberspace and the physical domain, the cognitive challenges this represents, and proposes a theoretical framework - the Hybrid Space - allowing for the application of psychological concepts in assessment, training and action.

Keywords

Cyberspace Physical domain Cyber-physical system Cyber security Socio-technical system Hybrid space Human factors 

References

  1. 1.
    Ministry of Defence, United Kingdom: Future Trends Programme - Future Operating Environment 2035, 1st edn. First Published 14 December 2015. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/future-operating-environment-2035
  2. 2.
    Kegan, R., Lahey, L.: Immunity to Change. Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation, Boston (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Whitman, M., Mattord, H.: Principles of Information Security, 4th edn. Cengage Learning, Boston (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    NERC, Security Guideline for the Electricity Sector: Identifying Critical Cyber Assets (2015) http://www.nerc.com/docs/cip/sgwg/Critcal_Cyber_Asset_ID_V1_Final.pdf
  5. 5.
    von Solms, R., van Niekerk, J.: From information security to cyber security. Comput. Secur. 38, 97–102 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Andrews, J., Buzzi, S., Choi, W., Hanly, S.V., Lozano, A., Soong, A.C.K., Zhang, C.J.: What will 5G be? IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 32(6), 23–44 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Trujillo, C.: The Limits of Cyberspace Deterrence. JFQ 74, 3rd Quarter 2014 (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tikk-Ringas, E., Kerttunen, M., Spirito, C.: Cyber Security as a Field of Military Education and Study. JFQ 74, 3rd Quarter 2014 (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mancuso, V.F., Strang, A.J., Funke, G.J., Finomore, V.S.: Human factors of cyber attacks: a framework for human-centered research. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 58th Annual Meeting – 2014, pp. 437–441 (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lamay, A., Leblanc, S., De Jesus, T.: Lessons form the strategic corporal - implications of cyber incident response. In: SIGMIS-CPR 2015, 4–6 June 2015. ACM, Newport Beach (2015). ISBN 978-1-4503-3557-7/15/06Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Røyslien, H.: When the generation gap collides with military structure: the case of norwegian cyber officers. J. Mil. Strateg. Stud. 16(3), 1065–1082 (2015)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Joiner, B., Josephs, S.: Leadership Agility, Five Levels of Mastery for Anticipating and Initiating Change. Wiley, San Francisco (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zanenga, P: Knowledge eyes, nature and emergence in society, culture, and economy. IEEE (2014). 978-1-4799-4735-5/14Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Paterson, D.M.: Work domain analysis for network management revisited: infrastructure, teams and situation awareness. In: IEEE International Inter-Disciplinary Conference on Cognitive Methods inSituation Awareness and Decision Support (CogSIMA). IEEE (2014). 978-1-4799-3564-2/14Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sawilla, R.E., Wiemer, D.J.: Automated computer network defence technology demonstration project (ARMOUR TDP). IEEE (2011). 978-1-4577-1376-7/11Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zhong, C., Yen, J., Liu, P., Erbacher, R., Etoty, R., Garneau, C.: ARSCA: a computer tool for tracing the cognitive processes of cyber-attack analysis. In: IEEE International Inter-Disciplinary Conference on Cognitive Methods inSituation Awareness and Decision Support (CogSIMA) (2015). 978-1-4799-8015-4/15Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Williams, B.T.: The joint force commander’s guide to cyberspace operations. JFQ 73, 2nd Quarter 2014. Major General Brett T. Williams, USAF, is the Director of Operations, J3, for U.S. Cyber Command (2014)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Proctor, R.W. Chen, J.: The role of human factors/ergonomics in the science of security: decision making and action selection in cyberspace. Hum. Factors J. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. 57(5), 721–727 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gutzwiller, R.S., Fugate, S., Sawyer, B.D., Hancock, P.A.: The Human Factors of Cyber Network Defense. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting. vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 322–326. SAGE Publications, September 2015Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bonner, L.E.: Cyber Power in 21st Joint Warfare. JFQ 74, 3rd Quarter 2014. Lieutenant Colonel E. Lincoln Bonner III, USAF, is Director of Operations at the Space Operations Squadron Aerospace Data Facility–Colorado (2014)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    NATO MC 0616: NATO Cyber Defence Education and Training Plan. 6th Draft MC 0616. NATO UNCLASSIFIED (2015)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Arnold, T., et al.: Towards A Career Path in Cyberspace Operations for Army Officers. J. Art. Aug. 18(10), 37am (2014)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dombrowski, P., Demchak, C.C.: Cyber war, cybered conflict, and the maritime domain. Naval War Coll. Rev. 67(2), 70 (2014)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hu, F.: Cyber-Physical Systems: Integrated Computing and Engineering Design. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Coghlan, D., Brydon-Miller, M. (eds.): The SAGE Encyclopedia of Action Research. Sage, London (2014)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ahmed, S.H., Kim, G., Kim, D.: Cyber physical system: architecture, applications and research challenges. In: Wireless Days, 2013 IFIP. IEEE (2013). doi: 10.1109/WD.2013.6686528
  27. 27.
    Sanislav, T., Miclea, L.: Cyber-physical systems – concepts challenges and research areas. CEAI 14(2), 28–33 (2012)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Troxler, P., Lauche, K.: Assessing Creating and Sustaining Knowledge Culture in Organisations (2014). http://www.academia.edu/1964062/Assessing_Creating_and_Sustaining_Knowledge_Culture_in_Organisations
  29. 29.
    Hoffman, R.R., Ward, P., Feltovich, P.J., DiBello, L., Fiore, S.M., Andrews, D.: Accelerated Expertise: Training for High Proficiency in a Complex World. Psychology Press, New York (2014). http://www.psypress.com/books/details/9781848726529
  30. 30.
    Farwell, J., Rohozinski, R.: The new reality of cyber war. Survival (00396338) 54(4), 107–120 (2012). Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhostCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Oltromani, A., Noam, B.-A., Cranor, L., Bauer, L., Christin, N.: General requirements of a hybrid-modeling framework for cyber security. In: Military Communications Conference (MILCOM). IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bennet, K.B.: Ecological interface design: military C2 and computer network defence. In: IEEE 2014 International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 5–8 October 2014, San Diego, CA, USA (2014)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sookermany, AMcD: What is a skillful soldier? An epistemological foundation for understanding military skill acquisition in (post) modernized armed forces. Armed Forces Soc. 38(4), 582–603 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Castells, M.: Information Technology, Globalization and Social Development. UNRISD Discussion Paper no. 114, Geneva, UNRI (1999)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Baas, D., Castelijns, J., Vermeulen, M., Martens, R., Segers, M.: The relation between assessment for learning and elementary students’ cognitive and metacognitive strategy use. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 85(1), 33–46 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Hannah, S.T., Avolio, B.J.: Ready or not: how do we accelerate the developmental readiness of leaders? J. Organ. Behav. 31(8), 1181–1187 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Woods, D.D., Hollnagel, E.: Joint Cognitive System: Patterns in Cognitive Systems Engineering. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Jacobs, J.E., Paris, S.G.: Children’s metacognition about reading: Issues in definition, measurement, and instruction. Educ. Psychol. 22, 255–278 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Cohen, M.S., Freeman, J.T., Thompson, B.: Critical thinking skills in tactical decision making: a model and a training strategy. In: Making Decisions Under Stress: Implications for Individual and Team Training, pp. 155–190 (1998)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Øyvind Jøsok
    • 1
  • Benjamin J. Knox
    • 1
  • Kirsi Helkala
    • 1
  • Ricardo G. Lugo
    • 2
  • Stefan Sütterlin
    • 2
  • Paul Ward
    • 3
  1. 1.Norwegian Defence, Cyber AcademyLillehammerNorway
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyLillehammer University CollegeLillehammerNorway
  3. 3.The Applied Cognition & Cognitive Engineering (AC2E) Research GroupUniversity of HuddersfieldManchesterUK

Personalised recommendations