plese help me give some constructive feedback to my classmates post following the below guidelines

In your replies to the initial posts of your identified peers, focus on your peers' discussions of questions and value. What other questions might you ask if you used the techniques assigned to your peers? How might these additional questions add value to the analytic line?

Hello everyone,

The "connect the dots", portion of all investigations is considered analytics or human logic attempting to comprehend compounded evidence or circumstances leading to an overall conclusion. Three categories exist in analytics including diagnostic, contrarian, and imaginative. Richards Heuer, Jr. (1999) explains diagnostic analytics are primarily aimed at making analytic arguments, assumptions, or intelligence gaps more transparent. Contrarian analytics are techniques used to specifically challenge current thinking. Finally, imaginary analytics target new ideas, different perspectives, and any possible future outcomes. Each category breaks down further into techniques used to address the diagnostic, contrarian, and imaginative analytic process, subsequently "connecting the dots" giving criminal justice professionals the ability to make conclusions and take action.

The "Team A-Team B" technique can be simply explained as two or more separate hypotheses challenging one another. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA, 2009) identifies this technique specifically views equally strong perspectives on the same incident and generally requires a significant amount of analytic resources and time to make the most accurate decision. An example of the "Team A-Team B" technique can be seen through a political lens with policy making. This technique would fall under the contrarian category, as it displays an act of challenging current thinking, perspectives, or hypotheses.

In my experience as a patrol officer, a common call where the "Team A-Team B" contrarian technique would be used is domestic battery incidents. Two or more officers normally respond to domestic battery calls due to the violent nature, and officer safety risks. After all parties involved are separated, officers will interview each separately and simultaneously. After initial interviews, especially during an incident where both parties have visual injuries and convoluted stories, officers use contrarian analytics in discussing who is the primary aggressor. An additional example of the "Team A-Team B" contrarian technique is perspective-based policy decisions conducted by a collective group of people with opposing ideas, like a congress.

Using this technique to question an opposing perspective on the same issue at a minimum, allows those holding opposing views to feel that their views have been given equal attention. An issue is brought to the surface with all factors to be evaluated for the best possible conclusion. Finally, If opposing positions are well established, it can be useful to place analysts on teams that will advocate positions they normally do not, this allows for a thorough understanding of each perspective.

Thank you,

Tanner Chaney