Pär Anders Granhag: The Scharff technique for eliciting human intelligence

I assume we agree that all wars are battles for information, and that even if cold wars lack the actual combat, they are still about information – to get to the status and the intentions of the opposing side. Some argue that we have entered a new era of cold war. Modern national security work utilizes sources such as geospatial intelligence, signals intelligence and social media intelligence, but the most critical information often comes from human sources: human intelligence (HUMINT). The science of today is so far passed earlier wars with respect to technology; there is little to learn in terms of reconnaissance, weapons and defense systems. Interrogation, however, is unchanged since antiquity – it is about the dynamics between two persons competing for information. Here I will give an example of how psychology might assist in collecting HUMINT. It is obvious that psychology always is an integral part in recruiting human sources, but for this short note I will focus on the actual interaction between an intelligence officer and a source of some kind – I will talk on the issue of elicitation.  

Elicitation is a particular way of collecting information; the first part of the concept is to gently gather new information, the second is to collect it without revealing what you’re after, and the third part is to leave the source with the impression that he or she didn’t contribute with anything new. Elicitation and traditional interrogations coincide only with respect to the objective of obtaining new information. But even for this part they are different – elicitation is about advanced psychology and subtle ways of gathering information, whereas traditional interrogations typically are about primitive psychology and ways of forcing out information.

I have spent 20 years studying a master of elicitation: Hanns Joachim Scharff (1907-1992), who worked as an interrogator for the German Luftwaffe during WWII. Many sources speak to that Hanns Scharff was very successful at his job and he is often portrayed as a legendary interrogator - but his approach is typically sketchily described. Scharff never used coercive or harsh methods, instead he was quick to appreciate the value of learning about his prisoners’ counter-interrogation tactics (CITs). In essence, he tailored his own strategies and tactics in the light of his prisoners’ CITs. Broadly speaking, Scharff used his knowledge on his prisoners’ CITs to develop general strategies to engage his prisoners in meaningful conversations, and to tailor specific tactics to elicit small pieces of information (for example, he was a master in terms of using claims to elicit information). Together with my colleagues I have conducted three waves of research on the Scharff technique; the first was about conceptualization and proof of concept. For the second wave we examined the effectiveness of the Scharff-technique in different contexts, for example the sources’ level of cooperation and to what extent the technique can be used for small cells of sources. For our third wave we trained different professional groups in the technique, for example intelligence officers and police handlers. All in all, for these scientific tests the Scharff-technique has lived up to its reputation – the technique outperforms more standard and commonly used elicitation techniques. I have on request given presentations on Scharff’s technique in many different countries, and for high profile organizations such as the MI5, Defence Intelligence (UK), NYPD Intelligence Division, LAPD Major Crimes Division and the FBI.