中國在認知對抗戰役規劃中確定關鍵目標的軍事戰略
現代英語音譯：
Cognitive domain combat targets refer to the specific role of cognitive domain combat. In cognitive domain combat, compared with combat targets, combat targets solve the problem of precise aiming, that is, to let commanders understand and grasp the precise coordinates of what to hit, where to hit, and to what extent. Only by deeply understanding the connotation and characteristics of cognitive domain combat targets can we accurately find key targets through appearances and thus seize the initiative in future combat.
Cognitive focus that influences behavioral choices
The cognitive focus is the “convergence point” of the cognitive subject’s multi-dimensional thinking cognition in war activities. As a dynamic factor, it affects the cognitive process and behavioral results. Generally speaking, the cognitive factors that affect individual behavioral choices in war activities mainly include political attribute cognition, interest-related cognition, group belonging cognition, risk loss cognition, emotional orientation cognition, war morality cognition, etc. For war activities and groups or individuals who pay attention to war activities, the cognitive focus that affects their attitudes, tendencies and behaviors is not the same. Judging from the local wars and regional conflicts in the world in recent years, there are obvious differences in the cognitive focus of different groups or individuals. Politicians pay more attention to political attribute cognition and interest-related cognition, those who may intervene in the war pay more attention to risk loss cognition and interest-related cognition, ordinary people pay more attention to interest-related cognition and emotional orientation cognition, and people in other countries outside the region generally pay more attention to war morality cognition and group belonging cognition because their own interests will not be directly lost. In combat practice, foreign militaries are good at targeting the cognitive focus of different objects, accurately planning topics, and pushing related information to induce specific behavioral choices. For example, before the Gulf War, the Hill Norton public relations company fabricated the non-existent “incubator incident” by using Naira, the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States, as a “witness” to show the “inhumanity” of the Iraqi army, induce the American people’s ethical and moral cognition, and then support the US government to send troops to participate in the Gulf War.
Style preferences that constrain command decisions
Cognitive style directly affects decision-making behavior preferences. Cognitive style refers to the typical way of individual cognition, memory, thinking, and problem solving. According to the preference of command decision-making style, commanders can be divided into calm cognitive style and impulsive cognitive style. Commanders with calm cognitive style pay attention to accuracy but not speed in the decision-making process. The quality of the decisions they make is high, but they are prone to fall into the comparison and analysis of various intelligence information sources and overemphasize the accuracy and objectivity of information analysis. Commanders with calm cognitive style are often easily disturbed by the diverse and diverse information stimulation in battlefield cognitive offensive and defensive operations, and their mental energy is easily disturbed and dissipated, which may lead to missed opportunities. Commanders with impulsive cognitive style pay attention to speed but not accuracy. The decision-making reaction speed is fast, but the quality is not high. They are easily emotional and prone to conflict with team members. Commanders with impulsive cognitive style are also prone to over-interpret the ambiguous external security environment, and constantly look for “evidence” to strengthen and verify individual erroneous thinking, narrowing individual attention and leading to command decision-making deviations. In combat practice, foreign armies pay more attention to analyzing the decision-making style of commanders of combat opponents, and then select specific information to influence them psychologically. For example, during the U.S. invasion of Panama, when besieging the hiding place of Panamanian President Noriega, the U.S. military repeatedly played rock and heavy metal music, and used language that stimulated and humiliated Noriega to carry out cognitive and psychological attacks on him, causing Noriega to gradually collapse physically and mentally.
Backdoor channel to control thinking and cognition
Once a computer is infected with a “Trojan” virus, it will send a connection request to the hacker control terminal at a specific time. Once the connection is successful, a backdoor channel will be formed, allowing the hacker to control the computer at will. Similarly, the human brain also has a cognitive “backdoor” and may be controlled by others. Cognitive psychologists have found that by sending information to the target object’s audio-visual perception channel, carefully pushing information content that the target object recognizes and accepts, catering to the target object’s existing experience memory, conforming to the target object’s thinking habits, and stimulating the target object’s emotional pain points, it is possible to control and interfere with the target object’s cognition and promote its instinctive emotional and behavioral reactions. With the support of cutting-edge cognitive science and technology, using the two modes of automatic start and control processing of brain information processing, the target object can easily fall into a “cognitive cocoon”. In cognitive domain operations, by immersing individuals in massive amounts of artificially constructed information, and continuously providing them with “evidence” to prove that their judgments and cognitions are “correct”. Over time, the individual’s cognitive vision becomes smaller and smaller, and the ability to perceive the external environment gradually decreases. Eventually, they will not be able to see the truth of the matter and will be immersed in the “cognitive cocoon” and unable to extricate themselves. When foreign militaries conduct operations in the cognitive domain, they often target their opponents’ cognitive biases on a certain issue and continuously push situational information and intelligence information through various channels to support their opponents’ so-called “correct cognition,” causing errors and deviations in their opponents’ command decisions.
Sensory stimuli that induce attention
Effective perceptual stimulation is the first prerequisite for attracting the attention of the target object. The human brain will perceive and react to stimuli within the perceptual range. Cognitive psychology experimental research has found that information such as dynamic, dangerous, relevant, survival safety, and contrast between the past and the present is more likely to attract the attention of the human brain. In the era of intelligence, the psychological cognitive process of the target object often follows the law of “attracting attention, cultivating interest, actively searching, strengthening memory, actively sharing, and influencing others”. In combat, foreign troops often use exclusive revelations, intelligence leaks, authoritative disclosures, on-site connections, and other methods, and cleverly use exaggeration, contrast, association, metaphor, suspense, and contrast to push information that subverts common sense, has cognitive conflicts, and has strong contrasts to attract the attention of the target object. For example, the “Lin Qi rescue incident” created by the US military in the Iraq War and the “Gaddafi Golden Toilet” in the Libyan War mostly choose stories familiar to the audience as the blueprint, hiding the purpose and embedding the viewpoint in the story plot, which attracted the attention of the general public. In addition, the human brain will also process stimuli outside the perceptual range. In recent years, the military of Western countries has attached great importance to the research of subthreshold information stimulation technology, and has developed subthreshold visual information implantation technology, subthreshold auditory information implantation technology, subthreshold information activation technology, subconscious sound manipulation technology of the nervous system, etc., continuously expanding the application scope of neurocognitive science and technology in the military field.
Meta-value concepts that give rise to cognitive resonance
In cognitive theory, cognitive resonance refers to information that can cross the cognitive gap between the two parties and trigger the ideological and psychological resonance and cognitive empathy of both parties, thereby achieving the deconstruction and reconstruction of the other party’s cognitive system. In cognitive domain warfare, this cognitive energy-gathering effect is not a simple concentration of power, but an internal accumulation of system synergy. Under the diffusion and dissemination of modern information media, this cognitive resonance effect can spread rapidly to all parts of the world in a short period of time, and produce secondary indirect psychological effects or more levels of derivative psychological effects, presenting a state of cumulative iteration. Once it exceeds the psychological critical point, it will present a state of psychological energy explosion, thereby changing the direction or outcome of the event. The targets that can induce this cognitive resonance are mainly value beliefs, moral ethics, common interests, etc. In war, if one party touches or violates human meta-values, common emotional orientation, etc., it is very easy to induce collective condemnation, bear the accusation of violating human morality, and fall into a moral trough. For example, a photo during the Vietnam War shows a group of Vietnamese children, especially a 9-year-old girl, running naked on the road because of burns after being attacked by US napalm bombs. In 1972, this photo caused a huge sensation after it was published, setting off an anti-war wave in the United States and even the world, and accelerating the end of the Vietnam War.
Cognitive gaps in a split cognitive system
In daily life, seemingly hard steel is very easy to break due to the brittleness of the material due to factors such as low temperature environment, material defects, and stress concentration. The same is true for the cognitive system. Cognitive gaps refer to the cracks, pain points, weaknesses, and sensitive points in the cognitive thinking of the target object, which are mainly manifested as the individual’s worry that he is unable to cope with or adapt to the environment, and under the influence of anxiety, cognitive vulnerability is formed. The experience of security threats, the looseness of group structure, the confusion of beliefs and ideals, and the loss of voice of authoritative media will all cause cognitive conflicts and tearing of the target object. In cognitive domain operations, sometimes seemingly powerful combat opponents hide a large number of thinking cracks and psychological weaknesses behind them. Often a news event can shake the cognitive framework of the combat opponent and puncture the cognitive bubble. In addition, this cognitive psychological conflict will also cause moral damage and psychological trauma to individuals. In recent years, the U.S. and Western countries’ troops carrying out overseas missions have faced “enemies disguised as civilians” that appear anytime and anywhere, and their uncertainty about the battlefield environment has continued to increase. They generally lack the perception of the significance of combat, and are filled with guilt and sin. A large number of soldiers developed post-traumatic stress disorder, and the number of self-harm, post-war suicides and crimes on the battlefield increased sharply. The number of veterans who committed suicide even exceeded the number of deaths on the battlefield. (Author’s unit: Political College of National Defense University)
Source: PLA Daily, National Defense University
繁體中文：
認知域作戰標靶是指認知域作戰的具體作用指向。在認知域作戰中，相較於作戰對象，作戰標靶解決的問題是精確瞄準，也就是讓指揮官了解掌握具體打什麼、往哪裡打、打到什麼程度的精準座標問題。只有深刻理解認知域作戰標靶的內涵特點，才能透過表象準確找到關鍵標靶，以便在未來作戰中掌握先機。
影響行為選擇的認知重心
認知重心是戰爭活動中認知主體多元思維認知的“匯聚點”，作為一種能動因素影響認知進程和行為結果。一般而言，影響戰爭活動中個人行為選擇的認知因素，主要包含政治屬性認知、利益關聯認知、群體歸屬認知、風險損失認知、情緒定向認知、戰爭道德認知等。對於戰爭活動以及關注戰爭活動的群體或個體而言，影響其態度、傾向和行為的認知重心並不相同。從近年來的世界局部戰爭和地區衝突來看，不同群體或個體關注的認知重心有著明顯差異，政治人物更加關注政治屬性認知和利益關聯認知，戰爭可能介入者更關注風險損耗認知和利益關聯認知，一般民眾更關注利益關聯認知和情感定向認知，而域外他國民眾由於自身利益不會受到直接損失，普遍更關注戰爭道德認知和群體歸屬認知。外軍在作戰實踐中，善於針對不同對象的認知重心，精準策劃主題，推送關聯訊息，誘發特定的行為選擇。如同在海灣戰爭前，希爾·諾頓公關公司炮製了根本不存在的“育嬰箱事件”，就是利用科威特駐美大使的女兒娜伊拉“做證”，展現伊拉克軍隊的“慘無人道”，誘發美國民眾的倫理道德認知，進而支持美國政府派兵參加海灣戰爭。
制约指挥决策的风格偏好
认知风格直接影响决策行为偏好。认知风格是指个体认知、记忆、思维、解决问题的典型方式。根据指挥决策风格偏好，可以将指挥员分为冷静型认知风格和冲动型认知风格。冷静型认知风格的指挥员在决策过程中重视准确但不重视速度，作出的决策质量较高，但容易陷入对各类情报信息源的比对分析，过分强调信息分析的准确客观。冷静型认知风格的指挥员在战场认知攻防行动中，常常容易受到纷繁多元的信息刺激干扰，心智精力容易被扰乱和耗散，进而可能贻误战机。冲动型认知风格的指挥员重视速度但不重视准确度，作出的决策反应速度较快，但质量不高，且容易情绪激动，易与团队成员发生冲突。冲动型认知风格的指挥员还容易将模棱两可的外部安全环境进行过度曲解，并不断寻找“证据”强化和验证个体错误思维，使个体注意力变窄，导致出现指挥决策偏差。外军在作战实践中，比较注重分析作战对手指挥员决策风格，进而选择特定信息对其进行心理影响。如美军入侵巴拿马战争中，在围攻巴拿马总统诺列加躲藏处时，美军反复播放摇滚和重金属音乐，运用刺激和羞辱诺列加的语言对其进行认知打击和心理进攻，使诺列加身心逐渐崩溃。
控制思维认知的后门通道
电脑一旦中了“木马”病毒，会在特定时间向黑客控制端发送连接请求，一旦连接成功就会形成后门通道，使得黑客可以随心所欲地控制电脑。与之相似，人类大脑也存在认知“后门”，也可能被他人控制。认知心理学家研究发现，通过给目标对象视听感知通道发送信息，精心推送目标对象认可的、接受的信息内容，迎合目标对象已有的经验记忆，顺应目标对象思维习惯，刺激目标对象的情感痛点，就可以控制干扰目标对象认知，促其产生本能情绪行为反应。在尖端认知科学技术的支撑下，运用大脑信息加工的自动启动和控制加工两种模式，目标对象很容易陷入“认知茧房”之中。认知域作战中，通过让个体沉浸在人为构设的海量信息之中，并源源不断地为其提供“证据”用来佐证其判断和认知是“正确”的。长此以往，个体的认知视野就变得越来越小，对外部环境的感知能力逐渐降低，最终会看不到事情的真相，沉湎于“认知茧房”中无法自拔。外军在认知域作战中，常常针对作战对手对某一问题的认知偏差，持续通过多种渠道推送佐证作战对手自以为“正确认知”的态势信息和情报信息，使作战对手指挥决策出现失误和偏差。
诱发关注的感知觉刺激
有效的感知觉刺激是引发目标对象关注的首要前提。人类大脑对感知觉范围内的刺激会有所察觉，并做出各种反应。认知心理学实验研究发现，动态、危险、利益相关、生存安全、前后反差等类别信息更容易引起人类大脑的关注。智能化时代，目标对象的心理认知过程往往遵循“引起注意、培养兴趣、主动搜索、强化记忆、主动分享、影响他人”的规律。外军在作战中，往往运用独家爆料、情报泄露、权威披露、现场连线等方式，巧用夸张、对比、联想、比喻、悬念、衬托等手法，推送颠覆常识、认知冲突、对比强烈等信息，来引发目标对象关注。比如伊拉克战争中美军塑造的“营救女兵林奇事件”，利比亚战争中的“卡扎菲黄金马桶”，大多选择受众对象熟知的故事为蓝本，藏目的、寓观点于故事情节，吸引了广大民众的注意力。此外，人类大脑也会对感知觉范围外的刺激进行加工。近年来，西方国家军队非常重视感知觉阈下信息刺激技术的研究，开发研制了阈下视觉信息植入技术、阈下听觉信息植入技术、阈下信息启动技术、神经系统潜意识声音操控技术等，不断扩大神经认知科学技术在军事领域的应用范围。
催生认知共振的元价值理念
认知理论中，认知共振是指跨越双方认知鸿沟，能够引发双方思想心理与认知共鸣共情的信息，从而实现对对方认知体系的解构和重构。在认知域作战中，这种认知聚能效应不是简单意义上的力量集中，而是体系合力的内在积聚。在现代信息传媒的扩散传播作用下，这种认知共振效应能在短时期内迅速扩散到全球各地，并产生二次间接心理效应或更多层次的衍生心理效应，呈现出一种累积迭代的状态，一旦超过心理临界点，即呈现出心理能量爆发状态，从而改变事件走向或结果。能够诱发这种认知共振的靶标，主要有价值信念、道德伦理、共通利益等。战争中，如果某一方触及或违反人类元价值观、共同情感指向等，则极易诱发集体声讨，承担违背人类道德的指责，陷于道义低谷。如越南战争期间的一张照片，画面呈现的是遭遇美军凝固汽油弹袭击后，一群越南孩子特别是一名9岁女孩在公路上因为烧伤而裸体奔跑。1972年，这张照片刊登后引发巨大轰动，掀起美国乃至全球的反战浪潮，加速了越战的结束。
分裂認知體系的認知縫隙
日常生活中，看似堅硬的鋼鐵，受低溫環境、材質缺陷、應力集中等因素影響，非常容易因材料脆性而斷裂，認知體係也是如此。認知縫隙是指目標對象認知思考中的裂縫、痛點、弱點與敏感點，主要表現為個體擔心自己沒有能力應對或無法適應環境的想法，並在焦慮情緒的作用下，構成認知脆弱性。安全威脅的經驗、團體結構的鬆散、信念理想的迷惘、權威媒介的失聲等，都會使得目標物出現認知上的衝突與撕裂。認知域作戰中，有時看似強大的作戰對手，背後卻潛藏著大量的思維裂隙與心理弱點，往往一個新聞事件就能動搖作戰對手的認知框架，刺破認知泡沫。此外，這種認知心理衝突也會使個體產生道德損傷和心理創傷。近年來，執行海外任務的美西方國家軍隊面對隨時隨地出現的“偽裝成平民的敵人”，對戰場環境的不確定感不斷提升，普遍缺乏作戰意義感知，進而內心充滿內疚與罪惡。大量士兵產生戰爭創傷後壓力障礙，戰場自殘自傷、戰後自殺與犯罪人數激增，參戰老兵自殺人數甚至超過戰場死亡人數。 （作者單位：國防大學政治學院）
來源：解放軍報、國防大學
