Definitional ambiguity in cognitive warfare: a critical and systematic conceptual review through ideal-type analysis

Cognitive warfare is a relatively new concept in both military and academic discourse. The article's purpose is to advance conceptual clarity regarding cognitive warfare and to support future policy-oriented and academic research that strengthens the field's conceptual and methodological foundations, understood here as the broader domain of communication and defense studies concerned with informational and cognitive forms of contestation. This article examines how the notion is conceptualized within the emerging body of research, drawing on a systematic literature review. With support from LLM-assisted analysis, the study employs an exploratory methodology to identify both conceptual commonalities and points of divergence. The review indicates that cognitive warfare remains an underdeveloped research field, characterized by broad assumptions and limited scientific rigor. While the concept may represent a reframing of long-standing practices, it may also serve a political function by drawing renewed attention to forms of influence and conflict that have been overshadowed in recent decades. The article concludes by outlining avenues for future interdisciplinary research, emphasizing the need for conceptual clarity, empirical operationalization, and a more nuanced understanding of how adversaries themselves articulate and employ cognitive warfare.