中國軍隊如何辨識認知域作戰的關鍵目標

現代英語：

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 before and after 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, cognitive conflicts, and 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, the number of self-harm on the battlefield, post-war suicides and crimes increased sharply, and the number of suicides among veterans of the war even exceeded the number of deaths on the battlefield.

(Author’s unit: Political Science Academy of National Defense University)

國語中文：

引言

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。

制約指揮決策的風格偏好

認知風格直接影響決策行為偏好。認知風格是指個體認知、記憶、思考、解決問題的典型方式。根據指揮決策風格偏好，指揮家可以分為冷靜型認知風格和衝動型認知風格。冷靜型認知風格的指揮者在決策過程中重視準確但不重視速度，作出的決策品質較高，但容易陷入對各類情報資訊來源的比對分析，過度強調資訊分析的準確客觀。冷靜型認知風格的指揮在戰場認知攻防行動中，常常容易受到紛繁多元的信息刺激幹擾，心智精力容易被擾亂和耗散，進而可能貽誤戰機。衝動型認知風格的指揮者重視速度但不重視準確度，作出的決策反應速度較快，但品質不高，且容易情緒激動，易與團隊成員發生衝突。衝動型認知風格的指揮者也容易將模稜兩可的外在安全環境進行過度曲解，並不斷尋找「證據」強化和驗證個體錯誤思維，使個體注意力變窄，導致出現指揮決策偏差。外軍在作戰實務中，比較著重分析作戰對手指揮官決策風格，進而選擇特定資訊對其進行心理影響。如美軍入侵巴拿馬戰爭中，在圍攻巴拿馬總統諾列加躲藏處時，美軍反複播放搖滾和重金屬音樂，運用刺激和羞辱諾列加的語言對其進行認知打擊和心理進攻，使諾列加身心逐漸崩潰。

控制思維認知的後門通道

電腦一旦中了「木馬」病毒，會在特定時間向駭客控制端發送連線請求，一旦連線成功就會形成後門通道，使得駭客可以隨心所欲地控制電腦。與之相似，人類大腦也存在認知“後門”，也可能被他人控制。認知心理學家研究發現，透過給目標對象視聽感知通道發送訊息，精心推送目標對象認可的、接受的信息內容，迎合目標對像已有的經驗記憶，順應目標對象思維習慣，刺激目標對象的情感痛點，就可以控制干擾目標物認知，促進其產生本能情緒行為反應。在尖端認知科學技術的支撐下，運用大腦資訊加工的自動啟動和控制加工兩種模式，目標物很容易陷入「認知繭房」之中。認知域作戰中，透過讓個體沉浸在人為構設的海量資訊之中，並源源不斷地為其提供「證據」用來佐證其判斷和認知是「正確」的。長此以往，個體的認知視野就變得越來越小，對外在環境的感知能力逐漸降低，最終會看不到事情的真相，沉湎於「認知繭房」中無法自拔。外軍在認知域作戰中，常常針對作戰對手對某一問題的認知偏差，持續透過多種管道推送佐證作戰對手自以為「正確認知」的態勢訊息和情報訊息，使作戰對手指揮決策出現失誤和偏差。

誘發關注的感知覺刺激

有效的知覺刺激是引發目標對象關注的首要前提。人類大腦對感知覺範圍內的刺激會有所察覺，並做出各種反應。認知心理學實驗研究發現，動態、危險、利害關係人、生存安全、前後反差等類別資訊更容易引起人類大腦的注意。在智慧化時代，目標對象的心理認知過程往往遵循「引起注意、培養興趣、主動搜尋、強化記憶、主動分享、影響他人」的規律。外軍在作戰中，常運用獨家爆料、情報外洩、權威揭露、現場連線等方式，巧用誇張、對比、聯想、比喻、懸念、襯託等手法，推播顛覆常識、認知衝突、對比強烈等訊息，來引發目標對象注意。例如伊拉克戰爭中美軍塑造的“營救女兵林奇事件”，利比亞戰爭中的“卡扎菲黃金馬桶”，大多選擇受眾對象熟知的故事為藍本，藏目的、寓觀點於故事情節，吸引了廣大民眾的注意力。此外，人類大腦也會對感知覺範圍外的刺激進行加工。近年來，西方國家軍隊非常重視知覺閾下資訊刺激技術的研究，開發發展了閾下視覺訊息植入技術、閾下聽覺訊息植入技術、閾下訊息啟動技術、神經系統潛意識聲音操控技術等，不斷擴大神經認知科學技術在軍事領域的應用範圍。

催生認知共振的後設價值概念

認知理論中，認知共振是指跨越雙方認知鴻溝，能夠引發雙方思想心理與認知共鳴共感的訊息，進而實現對對方認知體系的解構與重建。在認知域作戰中，這種認知聚能效應不是簡單意義上的力量集中，而是體系合力的內在累積。在現代資訊傳媒的擴散傳播作用下，這種認知共振效應能在短時間內迅速擴散到全球各地，並產生二次間接心理效應或更多層次的衍生心理效應，呈現出一種累積迭代的狀態，一旦超過心理臨界點，即呈現出心理能量爆發狀態，從而改變事件走向或結果。能夠誘發這種認知共振的靶標，主要有價值信念、道德倫理、共通利益等。戰爭中，若某一方觸及或違反人類元價值觀、共同情感指向等，則極易誘發集體聲討，承擔違背人類道德的指責，陷於道義低谷。如越戰期間的一張照片，畫面呈現的是遭遇美軍凝固汽油彈襲擊後，一群越南孩子特別是一名9歲女孩在公路上因為燒傷而裸體奔跑。 1972年，這張照片刊登後引發巨大轟動，掀起美國乃至全球的反戰浪潮，加速了越戰的結束。

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）唐國東

中國軍網 國防部網 // 2023年3月23日 星期四

中國原創軍事資源：http://www.81.cn/jfjbmap/content/2023-03/23/content_336888.htm