Forensic Psychology Flashcards
What is offender profiling?
a behavioural and analytical tool that is intended to help investigators accurately predict and profile the characteristics of unknown offenders
What are the 4 main stages in the construction of an FBI profile?
- Data assimilation (evidence like photographs, reports, etc.
- Crime scene classification (organised or disorganised)
- Crime reconstruction
- Profile generation
What are 4 evaluation points for the top-down approach?
+ Research support for a distinct organised category of offender
- Organised and disorganised types aren’t mutually exclusive
+ Wider application to other crimes
- Flawed evidence
Describe what the strength and weakness of research support for the top-down approach is (top-down approach)?
+ Support for a distinct organised category of offender.
Analysis of 100 US murders each committed by a serial killer. Stats test was used to identify correlations across different samples of behaviour.
Identified a subset of features for serial killings matching FBI’s typology for organised offenders, suggesting FBI typology approach has some validity.
-Organised and disorganised types aren’t mutually exclusive.
Argued that, in reality, it’s hard to classify killers as one or the other type, suggesting may be a continuum.
Describe what wider application to other crime the top-down approach has (top-down approach)?
+ Wider application to other crimes (e.g.: burglary)
Critics of the approach claimed technique applies to limited crimes, but reports are recently applied to burglary (leading to an 85% rise in solved cases in the US).
New categories (interpersonal and opportunistic)
Describe what the flawed evidence of the top-down approach is (top-down approach)?
- Flawed evidence
FBI profiling was developed using interviews with 36 murderers in the US (25 serial killers, 24 organised offenders, 12 disorganised).
- Poor sample as FBI didn’t select a random or large sample (same type of offender).
- No standard set of questions so each interview was different and so, not comparable, suggesting not to have sound, scientific basis.
What are the 4 evaluation points for the bottom-up approach?
+ Evidence for investigative psychology
-Database only contains info on solved crimes
+ Evidence to support geographical profiling
-Geographical profiling may not provide sufficient info
Describe what the strength and weakness of evidence for investigative psychology is (bottom-up approach)?
+ Analysis of 66 sexual assault cases (using stats test), concluded several behaviours identified as common in different samples of behaviour (can help link cases to previous repeat offenders).
- Case linkage depends on database of solved historical crimes.
Solved because it was straightforward to link these crimes together, making a circular argument.
This suggests investigative psychology my tell little about crimes that have few links between them and so remain unsolved.
Describe what the evidence for geographical profiling is (bottom-up approach)?
+Evidence to support geographical profiling
Info collated from 100 murder cases involving serial killers in the US. Stats tests identified spacial consistency in the behaviour of the killers.
‘Centre of gravity’ formed from the location of body disposal because offenders start from their home base and go in a different direction each time, which ends up creating a circular effect around the home base (more noticeable for those who travelled short distances).
So can be used to identify and offender.
Describe how geographical profiling may not provide sufficient info (bottom-up approach)?
-Geographical profiling may not be sufficient on its own.
May be reliant on the quality of data the police can provide, but not always accurate, can vary between police forces and an estimated 75% of crimes aren’t reported.
Causes question to the utility of the approach that relies on the accuracy of geographical data. Critics claim other factors are just as important when creating a profile.
This suggests that geographical info alone may not always lead to the successful capture of an offender.
What are the evaluation points of Lombroso’s ativistic form?
+Lombroso’s legacy changed the face of the study of crime
-Critics question whether Lombroso’s legacy is entirely positive
-Contradictory evidence in the link between atavism and crime
-Poor controlled method of investigation
Describe how Lombroso’s legacy changed the face of the study of crime (ativistic form)?
+Lombroso shifted the emphasis in crime research away from a moralistic discourse towards a more scientific position.
His concept of trying to decide types of people likely to commit particular crimes, is heralded as the beginning of offender profiling.
This suggests Lombroso made a major contribution to the science of criminology.
Describe why critics question if Lombroso’s legacy is entirely positive (Ativistic form)?
-His legacy isn’t entirely positive because of the racist undertone of his work.
Many features he classified as ativistic are most likely found among people of African decent. Suggesting they were more likely to be offenders which fitted with the 19th century eugenic attitudes).
This suggests some aspects of his theory were highly subjective rather than objective, influenced by racial prejudices of the crime.
Describe the contradictory evidence between ativism and crime?
-Goring (1913) conducted a comparison between 3000 non-offenders.
- he concluded there’s no evidence that offenders are a distinct group with unusual facial and cranial characteristics.
- which challenges the idea that offenders can be physically distinguished from the rest of the population are therefore unable to be a subsepecies.
Describe the poor controls of Lombroso’s research?
- he didn’t compare his offender sample (like Goring did) with a non-offender control group.
- this could’ve controlled for an assortment of confounding variables that may have explained higher crime rates in certain groups of people.
- research has demonstrated links between crime and social conditions, which explains offences (e.g: unemployment)
