Canter FBI Typology

Question 1

Canter aim

Answer 1

Test reliability of FBI typology.

Question 2

Canter procedure

Answer 2

Applied to 100 cases of serial killers in the USA.
Multidimensional scaling.
Paid attention to third crime.
Used Crime Classification Manual to categorise them as organised or disorganised.

Question 3

Canter Findings 1

Answer 3

Twice as many disorganised as organised.

More disorganised, or disorganised easier to identify?

Question 4

Canter Findings 2

Answer 4

Only two factors matched at a level greater than chance = concealing the body 70%, sex acts performed 75%.

Supports that profiling not applicable to all crimes. Useful crimes of violence and sexual deviance.

Question 5

Canter Findings 3

Answer 5

Most crime scene behaviour FBI profilers occur at a chance level, suggesting they are features of serial killers in general, rather than a particular type of serial killer.

Question 6

Reliability

Answer 6

Interviews of 36 serial killers in prison were unstructured and developed in an ad hoc fashion.

Question 7

Validity

Answer 7

No test of the typologies were ever done on a random sample of offenders.

Question 8

Practical difficulty

Answer 8

Where does disorganisation end and organisation begin?

Question 9

Canter conclusion

Answer 9

Instead of there being a distinction between two types of serial murder, all crimes will have an organised element to them, as we might expect from the fact the killers were not caught after three killings.
Distinction between serial killers may be function of the different ways in which they may exhibit disorganised aspects of their activities.
Canter argues profilers should pay more attention to individual differences in personality, behaviour.