Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Past Issues
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Print Subscriptions
  • About
    • About the Journal
    • About the Academy
    • Editorial Board
  • Feedback
  • Alerts
  • AAPL

User menu

  • Alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
  • AAPL
  • Alerts
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Past Issues
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Print Subscriptions
  • About
    • About the Journal
    • About the Academy
    • Editorial Board
  • Feedback
  • Alerts
Article CommentaryAnalysis and Commentary

Leadership Analysis and Political Psychology in the 21st Century

Kenneth B. Dekleva
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online September 2018, 46 (3) 359-363; DOI: https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.003771-18
Kenneth B. Dekleva
Dr. Dekleva is the McKenzie Foundation Endowed Chair in Psychiatry I, Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Director, Psychiatry-Medicine Integration, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX. The views expressed in this paper are entirely his own and do not represent the official views of the U.S. Government, the U.S. Department of State, or UT Southwestern Medical Center.
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

The election of President Trump has led to interest in his mental health and has resulted in heightened scrutiny regarding the American Psychiatric Association's Goldwater Rule, with its prohibition on opining psychiatrically on the mental health of public figures whom one has not examined in person. This article highlights the historic, methodological, forensic, and ethics challenges regarding psychiatric approaches to leadership analysis, and how these can offer policy makers options regarding national security decision-making.

The 2016 campaign and election of President Trump has led to a flurry of interest in not only his mental health,1 but more generally, in the mental health of world leaders. This has resulted in extensive scholarly commentary regarding the American Psychiatric Association's Goldwater Rule,2 with its prohibition on opining psychiatrically on the mental health of public figures whom one has not examined in person.3,–,7 This article, by a psychiatrist who has published numerous profiles of world leaders,8,–,15 outlines challenges regarding psychiatric approaches to leadership analysis.16 Overall, political psychology approaches to leadership analysis are but one piece of a larger, more complex analytic puzzle, which can serve national security interests in understanding the psyches of our adversaries, allowing policy makers greater options regarding decision-making in a variety of diplomatic and public policy settings.

The origins of leadership analysis and political psychology profiling date to 1943, when Dr. Walter Langer published, at the behest of the Office of Strategic Services, a classified analysis of Germany's Führer, Adolf Hitler; this work was later de-classified and published in 1972.17 Although beholden to the psychoanalytic approach of the day, Langer created a multidisciplinary team that analyzed raw data including Hitler's writings, speeches, movies of rallies, classified intelligence data, his medical reports, defector accounts, and collateral accounts of persons who had met Hitler in person. Langer emphasized understanding of Hitler's psychological makeup, and also made accurate predictions of his future behavior. Langer's work exerted a powerful intellectual influence, both in the fields of leadership analysis and political psychology, as developed by Dr. Jerrold Post, and criminal personality profiling as pioneered by Dr. James Brussel.18

In 1965, Post joined the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), where he founded a unit for the analysis of the psychology of world leaders. Over the next several decades, Post followed Langer's model, leading a team of psychiatrists, internists, psychologists, anthropologists, historians, and intelligence analysts, who developed classified leadership profiles of various world leaders for the intelligence community and senior U.S. policy makers.16,19 A high point involved the declassified “Camp David Profiles,” in which individual psychological assessments of Israel's Menachem Begin and Egypt's Anwar Sadat helped U.S. President Jimmy Carter achieve an understanding of negotiating tactics and unique circumstances, which paved the way for a successful outcome: the 1979 Camp David peace accords.20 In 1986, Post retired from the CIA and continued his career at George Washington University, where he and his associates published numerous leadership profiles, including those of Saddam Hussein,21 Bashar al-Assad,22 Kim Jong Il,23 Muammar Gaddafi,24 Hugo Chavez,25 Fidel Castro,26 Vladimir Putin,27 Osama bin Laden,28 Radovan Karadzic,8 and Slobodan Milosevic.9 Such profiles often attracted controversy, because of Post's use of diagnostic categories such as “malignant narcissism,” and the labeling of many such people as “rogue leaders.”29,–,31 But Post's methodology, like that of Langer, entailed a close examination of the leader's childhood, young adulthood, transition to midlife, relationships, speeches, collateral data, and writings. Post did not shy from predictions, some of which turned out to be wrong, but the greater emphases in such portraits involved a psychological understanding of a given leader's traits and political behavior and how such understanding might prove useful in diplomatic negotiations. Like Langer before him, Post emphasized the close relationship, almost a lock-and-key fit, between charismatic, narcissistic leaders, and their impassioned followers.

Ethics, Law, and the Goldwater Rule

In March 2017, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) affirmed its position regarding the Goldwater Rule, in response to a flurry of publications regarding the psychology of President Donald Trump.32 While the organization's focus has appeared to reflect its concern for embarrassment to the profession, in his recent review Dr. Paul Appelbaum cites other dangers.3 Psychiatrists publishing profiles of world leaders should be concerned not only with potential lawsuits, but also the risk of being reported for ethics violations or licensing board complaints.33 In any legal setting, it remains unclear whether such leadership profiles could pass a Daubert test, which involves the admissibility of expert scientific testimony.34 If practitioners and their customers in the policy, national security, and diplomatic communities believe that such profiles have value, then the Goldwater Rule may have a chilling effect and may serve to dissuade subsequent generations of younger practitioners from entering the field.

The other critical question, which the Goldwater Rule does not explicitly address, involves the intended audience or customer for the profile. In the case of work by Post and others, the audience includes not only academia and the media, but most saliently, the national security community and policy makers at the highest levels of the U.S. Government.35 In today's world, any such published profiles can also expect to receive careful analysis by the subject leader's national security team and intelligence services.36 A controversial profile could lead to hacking, online attacks by Internet trolls, or more serious forms of public and private harassment.37

Academic institutions may be sensitive to the media image created by work involving the intelligence community. Similar public relations concerns have at times dogged psychiatric and psychological researchers involved in studying military survival-evasion-resistance-escape (SERE) psychology, interrogation, and other topics involving national security.38 Academic practitioners of leadership analysis and political psychology might consider consulting their parent institution's public affairs offices before publication of such profiles.

In a sense, such concerns are common to forensic psychiatry, and both training and a solid grounding in its principles and challenges is a worthy background for practitioners of leadership profiling and political psychology. In addition, experience and familiarity with the national security strategy can assist in understanding the analytic process and how such information gets developed, disseminated, and used by senior policy makers.39

Methodological Challenges

The current state of the art has changed little since the publication of Post's work in 2003.16 Leadership profiles rely on a psychobiographical approach, although the descriptive language used today is less psychoanalytic, per se. The raw data, subject to different interpretations and various biases, include a leader's published writings, interviews, social media activity, speeches, videos, media appearances, and interviews with the leader's intimates, contacts, colleagues, and former employees/contacts/intimates, and defectors. Medical data, although often not available overtly, may be available via inference, or from the study of a leader's physique, gait, and other data; in addition, private medical data can be made available via leaks, interviews, writings, and publications by a given leader's treating clinicians.40,–,43

In the absence of overt mental illness (and most leaders profiled do not have mental illness), current methodology emphasizes the description of a leader's psychological traits, rather than DSM-V diagnoses. As Allen Frances has noted, most potential diagnoses of world leaders lack validity, not only because of the absence of a face-to-face evaluation, the problem explicitly addressed in the Goldwater Rule, but also because the leader likely evidences no clinical distress or dysfunction because of his purported symptoms and signs.44 Calling leaders narcissistic becomes a bit like calling bright persons smart.

A larger problem involves estimations of potential leaders' intellectual abilities, emotional intelligence, and IQ, based on inferences, often linked to their use of language and level of education, as well as accomplishments.45 Although potentially useful, such data can have methodologic pitfalls as well. A risk of cultural, implicit, and hindsight biases can easily bedevil the authors of such profiles. This is true, not only of IQ tests and of estimates of leader performance, but also of hypothetical psychological tests applied at a distance. Many such tests were developed and normed for a white, Western, male population, and norms for other cultures may not exist. Cross-cultural and implicit biases can thereby present formidable challenges to leadership analysts. Hence, deep understanding of a given leader's language and culture (including political culture) is critical in preventing cross-cultural or linguistic misunderstanding.

The role of classified data in leadership analysis warrants careful thought and commentary beyond intelligence agencies' concern regarding exposure of sources and methods;46 but attention to potential biases, including hearsay, personal motivations of sources, vetting of such sources, and risks of embellishment or minimization, requires the same cautions as exercised in the disciplines of forensic psychiatry and intelligence analysis.39

Predicting long-term health prognoses for leaders remains fraught with difficulty. Much of the epidemiologic literature regarding risk factors for cardiovascular disease, stroke, cancer, neurocognitive impairment, and mental illness is based on Western or U.S.-based norms.47 This becomes no less salient when one recognizes that most of the leaders of today's G-20 are in their 60s or 70s. Assessment of such risks may be mitigated by the fact that leaders tend to have access to state-of-the-art medical care, although Post and Robins have argued that being a national leader often predisposes one to getting less-qualified medical care, because of the psychological dynamics involved and the fact that the leader's physician(s) may have little meaningful influence on a given leader's health habits.48 Medical professionals, especially psychiatrists, are uniquely versed in understanding neuropsychiatric illness and behavior and the psychological overlay of medical/surgical illness. In 2010, President Clinton's personal physician accompanied him to North Korea, where he was included in Clinton's meetings with Kim Jong Il, which allowed for closer observation of the latter's purported residual neurologic and neurocognitive deficits after his stroke in 2008.49,50 Medical leadership analysis also requires understanding of a given leader's protective health factors, including genetics, psychological resilience, health habits, hobbies, and relationship with intimates, family, friends, and colleagues.

Novel quantitative approaches such as intelligence forecasting,51 psycholinguistic analyses,52 operational code analyses,53,54 and quantitative prediction55 may offer ways of predicting leadership behaviors differently from traditional, qualitative medical intelligence approaches, as has been highlighted in the work of Dr. Phil Tetlock56 and his colleagues in the Good Judgment Project, which is an intelligence community-sponsored project using crowdsourcing to forecast world events. Such approaches, combined with novel artificial intelligence (AI) approaches, may offer new insights into leadership behavior.57,58 Overall, this highlights the importance of leadership analysis and political psychology as one piece of intelligence analysis and as one piece of a larger methodological puzzle. It behooves psychiatrists and psychologists who perform leadership analyses to have some exposure, familiarity, and professional experience in intelligence analysis, international relations, and quantitative research methods, as noted above.

Finally, the work of Post (and others using similar methodology) has not been subjected to rigorous scientific outcome measures. Such criticisms are not new and have been noted in published critiques of the CIA's work in this field.59 In addition, senior leaders and policy makers, as well as media personalities and corporate executives, may have greater personal access to a given leader during summits, negotiations, and conferences, offering them raw data unmatched by the data presented in leadership profiles. Psychiatrists and psychologists working in this field should be able to anticipate and manage such methodological concerns.

A more complex concern involves the degree of influence (and how this in turn relates to underlying methodology) of such leadership profiles, which is impossible to measure and to separate from methodology, per se. The gold standard in the U.S. government would be for a profile, or components thereof, to be included in the Presidential Daily Brief (PDB).60 But the PDB is a heavily edited and carefully revised living document, and elements of a given profile may be enhanced, diluted, or even taken out of context. The question of degree of influence may be even more the case when customers (including senior leaders) in the diplomatic, intelligence, and policy communities express a distrust of such analyses, either because they trust their own instincts and political judgments, or because they have an inherent distrust of psychiatric and psychological approaches to understanding political and leadership behavior.

Future Considerations

What does the future hold for psychiatrists' roles in leadership analysis and political psychology? I would offer that the Goldwater Rule requires further revision to account for contemporary methodological, legal, and ethics concerns in leadership analysis and political psychology profiling, as noted above. It can serve as a useful set of guidelines and ought to allow for media activity and academic publishing, while encouraging practitioners to understand similar ethics, legal, and methodologic cautions and limitations as seen in the practice of forensic psychiatry. The answer, as in forensic psychiatry, lies in setting high, continuously evolving standards of education, scholarship, and peer review. There is an ongoing need for more education and formal training in the field of leadership analysis and political psychology, and professional psychiatric organizations should support such continuing education activities. Novel quantitative and AI methodologies can be expected to shape the field in many ways, given the rapid and amazing advances in such technologies. Forensic psychiatric researchers can follow in the rich legacy of Drs. Langer and Post and play an important role in leading this discipline through the 21st century.

Acknowledgments

The author thanks Ambassador Joseph DeTrani, Ambassador John Beyrle, Graham Fuller, Dr. Marc Sageman, and Dr. Paul Appelbaum for their thoughtful comments regarding this paper.

Footnotes

  • Disclosures of financial or other potential conflicts of interest: None.

  • © 2018 American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Lee BX
    : The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 27 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President. New York: St. Martin's Press, 2017
  2. 2.↵
    American Psychiatric Association: The Principles of Medical Ethics with Annotations Especially Applicable to Psychiatry. Revised Edition. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association, 2009. Available at: https://www.umassmed.edu/contentassets/0108c9324b6b456aa29c1c56ce7f22eb/psychiatric-principles-of-medical-ethics.pdf/. Accessed July 5, 2018
  3. 3.↵
    1. Appelbaum PS
    : Reflections on the Goldwater Rule. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 45:228–32, 2017
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    1. Martin-Joy J
    : Interpreting the Goldwater Rule. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 45:233–40, 2017
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    1. Levine MA
    : Journalism ethics and the Goldwater Rule in a “post-truth” media world. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 45:241–8, 2017
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Kroll J,
    2. Pouncey C
    : Ethics of APA's Goldwater Rule. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 44:226–35, 2016
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Post JM
    : Ethical considerations in psychiatric profiling of political figures. Psychiatr Clin N Am 25:635–46, 2002
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Dekleva KB,
    2. Post JM
    : Genocide in Bosnia: the case of Dr. Radovan Karadzic. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 25:485–96, 1997
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. 9.↵
    1. Dekleva KB,
    2. Post JM
    : Slobodan Milosevic: why the crisis could last. Christian Science Monitor, March 29, 1999, p11. Available at: https://www.csmonitor.com/1999/0329/p11s1.html/. Accessed July 5, 2018
  10. 10.↵
    1. Dekleva KB
    : Kim Jong Il's “Flowers for Kim Il Sung.” 38 North. August 19, 2010. https://www.38north.org/2010/08/kim-jong-il%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Cflowers-for-kim-il-sung%E2%80%9D/. Accessed at July 5, 2018
  11. 11.↵
    1. Dekleva KB
    : The many faces of Vladimir Putin: a political psychology profile. The Cipher Brief, January 22, 2017. Available at: https://www.thecipherbrief.com/column_article/the-many-faces-of-vladimir-putin-a-political-psychology-profile/. Accessed July 5, 2018
  12. 12.↵
    1. Dekleva KB
    : Path not pre-ordained: a profile of China's Xi Jinping. The Cipher Brief, September 7, 2017. Available at: https://www.thecipherbrief.com/column_article/path-not-preordained-profile-chinas-xi-jinping/. Accessed July 5, 2018
  13. 13.↵
    1. Kuo MA
    : Kim Jong Un's political psychology profile: insights from Ken Dekleva. The Diplomat, October 17, 2017. Available at: https://thediplomat.com/2017/10/kim-jong-uns-political-psychology-profile/. Accessed July 5, 2018
  14. 14.↵
    1. Kuo MA
    : The psychology of North Korea's Kim Jong Un: the measure of a man. Insights from Kenneth Dekleva. The Diplomat, March 18, 2018. Available at: https://thediplomat.com/2018/03/the-psychology-of-north-koreas-kim-jong-un-the-measure-of-a-man/. Accessed July 5, 2018
  15. 15.↵
    1. Dekleva KB
    : Kim Jong Il's “getting past no” with Kim Jong Un: The psychology of negotiation, and Kim's “art of the deal.” 38 North, May 21, 2018. Available at: https://www.38north.org/2018/05/kdekleva052118/. Accessed July 5, 2018
  16. 16.↵
    1. Post JM
    (ed): The Psychological Assessment of Political Leaders: With Profiles of Saddam Hussein and Bill Clinton. Ann Arbor, MI: U of Michigan Press, 2003
  17. 17.↵
    1. Langer WC
    : The Mind of Adolf Hitler: The Secret Wartime Report. New York: Basic Books, 1972
  18. 18.↵
    1. Cannell M
    : Incendiary: The Psychiatrist, the Mad Bomber, and the Invention of Criminal Profiling. New York: Minotaur Books, 2017
  19. 19.↵
    1. Post JM
    : Narcissism and Politics: Dreams of Glory. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2015
  20. 20.↵
    1. Post JM
    : Personality Profiles in Support of the Camp David Summit. CIA Studies in Intelligence 23(Summer):1–5, 1979
    OpenUrl
  21. 21.↵
    1. Post JM
    : Explaining Saddam Hussein: A Psychological Profile. Presented to the U.S. House Armed Services Committee, December 1990
  22. 22.↵
    1. Post JM,
    2. Pertsis R
    : Bashar al-Assad is every bit his father's son. Foreign Policy, December 20, 2011. Available at: https://foreignpolicy.com/2011/12/20/bashar-al-assad-is-every-bit-his-fathers-son/. Accessed July 5, 2018
  23. 23.↵
    1. Post JM
    : Kim Jong-Il of North Korea: in the shadow of his father. Int J Appl Psychoanal Studies 5:191–210, 2008
    OpenUrl
  24. 24.↵
    1. Post JM
    : Qaddafi under siege. Foreign Policy, March 15, 2011. Available at: https://foreignpolicy.com/2011/03/15/qaddafi-under-siege-2/. Accessed July 5, 2018
  25. 25.↵
    1. Post JM
    : “El Fenomeno Chavez”: Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, modern day Bolivar. The Counterproliferation Papers: Future Warfare Series 39:1–38, 2007
    OpenUrl
  26. 26.↵
    1. Post JM
    : Leaders and Followers in a Dangerous World: The Psychology of Political Behavior. New York: Cornell University Press, 2004
  27. 27.↵
    1. McNamara J,
    2. Post JM
    : Putin the great: struggling to hold onto a crumbling empire. Huffington Post, April 1, 2014. Available at: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/jennifer-mcnamara/putin-the-great-strugglin_b_5072330.html/. Accessed July 5, 2018
  28. 28.↵
    1. Post JM
    : Killing in the name of God: Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. The Counterproliferation Papers: Future Warfare Series 18:1–25, 2002. Available at: https://fas.org/irp/world/para/post.pdf. Accessed July 5, 3028
    OpenUrl
  29. 29.↵
    1. Post JM
    : Current concepts of the narcissistic personality: implications for political psychology. Pol Psychol 14:99–121, 1993
    OpenUrl
  30. 30.↵
    1. Post JM
    : Narcissism and the charismatic leader-follower relationship. Pol Psychol 7:675–88, 1986
    OpenUrl
  31. 31.↵
    1. Kernberg OF
    : The couch at sea: psychoanalytic studies of group and organizational leadership. Int J Group Psychother 34:5–23, 1984
    OpenUrlPubMed
  32. 32.↵
    American Psychiatric Association: APA Reaffirms Support for Goldwater Rule. March 16, 2017. Available at: https://www.psychiatry.org/newsroom/news-releases/apa-reaffirms-support-for-goldwater-rule. Accessed August 18, 2018
  33. 33.↵
    1. Post JM
    : Profiling political leaders: an ethical quandary. Psychiatric Times, September 1996, pp 27–9
  34. 34.↵
    Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993).
  35. 35.↵
    1. Carey B
    : Teasing out policy insight from a character profile. New York Times, March 28, 2011. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/29/science/29psych.html. Accessed July 5, 2018
  36. 36.↵
    1. Bakos N
    : This is what foreign spies see when they read President Trump's Tweets. Washington Post, June 23, 2017. Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/president-trumps-twitter-feed-is-a-gold-mine-for-foreign-spies/2017/06/23/e3e3b0b0-5764-11e7-a204-ad706461fa4f_story.html?utm_term=.5b5237211c3e. Accessed July 5, 2018
  37. 37.↵
    1. Stein J
    : How Russia is using LinkedIn as a tool of war against US Enemies. Newsweek, August 3, 2017. Available at: http://www.newsweek.com/russia-putin-bots-linkedin-facebook-trump-clinton-kremlin-critics-poison-war-645696/. Accessed July 5, 2018
  38. 38.↵
    1. Eidelson R
    : Neuroscience, special forces, and Yale. Counterpunch, March 6, 2013. Available at: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/dangerous-ideas/201303/neuroscience-special-forces-and-ethics-yale/. Accessed July 5, 2018
  39. 39.↵
    1. Fingar T
    : Reducing Uncertainty: Intelligence Analysis and National Security. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2011
  40. 40.↵
    1. Clemente JD
    : In sickness and in health. Bull Atomic Sci 63:38–44, 66, 2007
    OpenUrl
  41. 41.↵
    1. Girardi AM,
    2. Pyenson LR,
    3. Morris J,
    4. et al
    : Impact of coronary heart disease on world leaders. Ann Int Med 134:287–90, 2001
    OpenUrlPubMed
  42. 42.↵
    1. Pyenson LR,
    2. Cove LA,
    3. Brickfield FX
    : Patterns of mortality in world leaders. Mil Med 163:797–800, 1998
    OpenUrlPubMed
  43. 43.↵
    1. Brickfield FX,
    2. Pyenson LR
    : Impact of stroke on world leaders. Mil Med 166:231–2, 2001
    OpenUrlPubMed
  44. 44.↵
    1. Frances A
    : Twilight of Sanity: A Psychiatrist Analyzes the Age of Trump. New York: William Morrow, 2017
  45. 45.↵
    1. Simonton DK
    : Presidential IQ, openness, intellectual brilliance, and leadership: estimates and correlations for 42 U.S. Chief Executives. Pol Psychol 27:511–26, 2006
    OpenUrl
  46. 46.↵
    1. Malone RD,
    2. Benedek DA
    : “I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill you”: classified information in the psychiatric evaluation. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 30:232–37, 2002
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  47. 47.↵
    1. Hurley LP,
    2. Dickinson LM,
    3. Estacio RO,
    4. et al
    : Prediction of cardiovascular death in racial/ethnic minorities using Framingham risk factors. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 3:181–7, 2010
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  48. 48.↵
    1. Robins RS,
    2. Post JM
    : When Illness Strikes the Leader: The Dilemma of the Captive King. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1993
  49. 49.↵
    1. Erlanger S
    : Doctor confirms Kim Jong Il Stroke. New York Times, December 11, 2008. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/12/world/asia/12kim.html. Accessed July 5, 2018
  50. 50.↵
    Bill Clinton's doctor “took close look at Kim Jong-Il”. ChoSunIlBo, September 17, 2009. Available at: http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2009/09/17/2009091700392.html/. Accessed July 5, 2018
  51. 51.↵
    1. Blinde L
    : IARPA launches hybrid forecasting competition. Intelligence Community News, August 20, 2017. http://intelligencecommunitynews.com/iarpa-launches-hybrid-forecasting-competition/. Accessed July 5, 2018
  52. 52.↵
    1. Post JM
    1. Weintraub W
    : Verbal behavior and personality assessment, in The Psychological Assessment of Political Leaders: With Profiles of Saddam Hussein and Bill Clinton. Edited by Post JM. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2003, pp. 137–52
  53. 53.↵
    1. Dyson SB,
    2. Parent MJ
    : The operational code approach to profiling political leaders: understanding Vladimir Putin. Intelligence and National Security 33:84–100, 2018
    OpenUrl
  54. 54.↵
    1. He K,
    2. Feng H
    : Xi Jinping's operational code beliefs and China's foreign policy. Chinese J Int Politics 6:209–31, 2013
    OpenUrl
  55. 55.↵
    1. Panetta A
    : How U.S. intelligence creates games to improve its forecasts, with Canadian help. The Canadian Press, July 3, 2017, Available at: https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/how-u-s-intelligence-created-games-to-improve-its-forecasts-with-canadian-help/. Accessed July 5, 2018
  56. 56.↵
    1. Tetlock PE,
    2. Gardner D
    : Superforecasting: The Art and Science of Prediction. New York: Broadway Books, 2016
  57. 57.↵
    1. Hartley D,
    2. Jobson K
    : Psychological profiling of world leaders. Informs 41 2014, Available at: https://www.informs.org/ORMS-Today/Public-Articles/December-Volume-41-Number-6/Psychological-profiling-of-world-leaders/. Accessed July 5, 2018
  58. 58.↵
    1. Hoffman D,
    2. Canton J
    : Being ‘future smart’ means thinking years—or decades—ahead. The Cipher Brief, December 21, 2017. Available at: https://www.thecipherbrief.com/column_article/future-smart-means-thinking-years-decades-ahead/. Accessed July 5, 2018
  59. 59.↵
    1. Omestad T
    : Psychology and the CIA: leaders on the couch. Foreign Policy 95:104–122, 1993
    OpenUrl
  60. 60.↵
    1. Priess D
    : The President's Book of Secrets: The Untold Story of Intelligence Briefings to America's Presidents from Kennedy to Obama. New York: Public Affairs, 2016
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online: 46 (3)
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online
Vol. 46, Issue 3
1 Sep 2018
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in recommending The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law site.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Leadership Analysis and Political Psychology in the 21st Century
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Leadership Analysis and Political Psychology in the 21st Century
Kenneth B. Dekleva
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online Sep 2018, 46 (3) 359-363; DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.003771-18

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Leadership Analysis and Political Psychology in the 21st Century
Kenneth B. Dekleva
Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online Sep 2018, 46 (3) 359-363; DOI: 10.29158/JAAPL.003771-18
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Ethics, Law, and the Goldwater Rule
    • Methodological Challenges
    • Future Considerations
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Toward Aspirational Forensic Mental Health Practice
  • Ethics Challenges in Correctional Mental Health
  • Methamphetamine-Associated Psychosis and Criminal Responsibility
Show more Analysis and Commentary

Similar Articles

Site Navigation

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Archive
  • Information for Authors
  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Feedback
  • Alerts

Other Resources

  • Academy Website
  • AAPL Meetings
  • AAPL Annual Review Course

Reviewers

  • Peer Reviewers

Other Publications

  • AAPL Practice Guidelines
  • AAPL Newsletter
  • AAPL Ethics Guidelines
  • AAPL Amicus Briefs
  • Landmark Cases

Customer Service

  • Cookie Policy
  • Reprints and Permissions
  • Order Physical Copy

Copyright © 2025 by The American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law