Advertisement

Using Behavioral Measures to Assess Counter-Terrorism Training in the Field

  • V. Alan Spiker
  • Joan H. Johnston
Conference paper
  • 2.2k Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6781)

Abstract

Development of behavioral pattern recognition and analysis skills is an essential element of counter-terrorism training, particularly in the field. Three classes of behavioral measures were collected in an assessment of skill acquisition during a US Joint Forces Command (JFCOM)-sponsored course consisting of combat tracking and combat profiling segments. These included situational judgment tests, structured behavioral observation checklists, and qualitative assessments of the emergence of specific knowledge-skills-attitudes over the course of training. Evidence was present in all three types of measures to indicate that behavioral pattern recognition and analysis skills were successfully acquired by most students (a mix of Army and civilian law enforcement personnel). The paper describes both the types of skills acquired and the statistical evidence that supports their acquisition over the course of field training. Implications for broader training of these critical skills are also discussed.

Keywords

Situational judgment tests behavioral observations scenarios knowledge-skills-attitudes profiling tracking 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Department of Defense Directive 3000.07: Irregular Warfare (December, 2008),http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/300007p.pdf (Retrieved from June 28, 2010)
  2. 2.
    Kobus, D., Williams, G.: Training tactical decision making under stress in cross- cultural environments. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Cross-Cultural Decision Making, Miami, FL [CD-ROM] (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Spiker, V.A., Johnston, J.H.: Limited objective evaluation of combat profiling training for small units. (Technical Report). US Joint Forces Command, Suffolk, VA (January 2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Institute for Training and Simulation. In: Schatz, S., Fautua, D.(eds.): Border Hunter research technical report. US Joint Forces Command, Suffolk, VA (July 2010) Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gessner, T.L., Klimoski, R.J.: Making sense of situations. In: Weekley, J.A., Ployhart, R.E. (eds.) Situational judgment tests. LEA, Mahwah (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    McDaniel, M.A., Morgeson, F.P., Finnegan, E.B., Campion, M.A., Braverman, E.P.: Use of situational judgment tests to predict job performance: A clarification of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology 86(4), 730–740 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brooks, M.E., Highhouse, S.: Can good judgment be measured? In: Weekley, J.A., Ployhart, R.E. (eds.) Situational judgment tests. LEA, Mahwah (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Weekley, J.A., Ployhart, R.E., Holtz, B.C.: On the development of situational judgment tests: Issues in item development, scaling, and scoring. In: Weekley, J.A., Ployhart, R.E. (eds.) Situational judgment tests. LEA, Mahwah (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Spiker, V.A., Johnston, J.H.: Border Hunter: Evaluation of field training (Technical Report). US Joint Forces Command, Suffolk, VA (July 2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. Alan Spiker
    • 1
  • Joan H. Johnston
    • 2
  1. 1.Anacapa Sciences, Inc.Santa Barbara
  2. 2.Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems DivisionOrlando

Personalised recommendations