Forensic psychology Flashcards
Offender profiling
A behavioural analytical tool that is intended to help investigators accurately predict and profile the characteristics of unknown offenders.
The top-down approach
Profilers start with a pre-established typology and work down to lower levels in order to assign offenders to one of 2 categories based on witness accounts and evidence from the crime scene.
organised offender
An offender who shows evidence of planning, targets a specific victim and tends to be socially and sexually competent with higher-than-average intelligence.
Disorganised offender
An offender who shows little evidence of planning, leaves clues and tends to be socially and sexually incompetent with lower-than-average intelligence.
The top-down approach to profiling originated in the US as a result of work carried out by the FBI in the 1970s.
The FBI’s Behavioural Science Unit drew upon data gathered from in-depth interviews with 36 sexually motivated murderers including Ted Bundy and Charles Manson.
- They concluded that the data could be categorised into organised and disorganised crimes/murders.
- Each category had certain characteristics which meant that if the data from a crime scene matched some of the characteristics of one category, we could predict other characteristics that would be likely. This could then be used etc find the offender.
Organised offenders show evidence of having planned the crime in advance.
- The victim is deliberately targeted and this suggests that the killer or rapist has a ‘type’ of victim they seek out.
- The offender maintains a high degree of control during the crime and may operate with almost detached surgical precision.
- There is little evidence or clues left behind at the scene.
- They tend to be above-average intelligence, in a skilled professional occupation and are socially and sexually competent.
Disorganised offenders show little evidence of planning, suggesting that their offences may be spontaneous, spur of the moment acts.
- The crime scene tends to reflect the impulsive nature of the attack - the body is usually still at the scene and there appears to have been little control on the part of the offender.
- They tend to have a lower-than-average IQ, be un unskilled work or unemployed, and often have a history of sexual dysfunction and failed relationships.
- They tend to live alone and often relatively close to where the offence took place.
Constructing and FBI profile - there are 4 main stages:
- Data assimilation - profiler reviews the evidence
- Crime scene classification - as either organised or disorganised.
- Crime reconstruction - hypotheses in terms of sequence of events, behaviour of the victim, etc.
- Profile generation - hypotheses related to the likely offender, e.g. of demographic background, physical characteristics, behaviour etc.
One strength of the top-down approach is that there is support for a distinct organised category of offender.
Canter et al. (2004) conducted an analysis of 100 US murders each committed by a different serial killer. Smallest space analysis was used -identifies correlations across different samples of behaviour.
- The analysis was used to assess the co-occurrence of 39 aspects of serial killings (including whether there was torture or restraint, attempt to conceal body, and weapon).
- This analysis revealed that there’s a subset of features of many serial killings which matched the FBI’s typology for organised offenders.
-> FBI typology approach has some validity.
Another strength of top-down profiling is that it can be adapted to other kinds of crime, such as burglary.
Critics of top-down profiling have claimed that the techniques only applies to a limited number of crimes, such as sexually-motivated murder. However, Meketa (2017) reports that top-down profiling has recently been applied to burglary, leading to and 85% rise in solved cases in 3 US states. The detection methods retains the organised-disorganised distinction but also adds 2 new categories: interpersonal and opportunistic.
One limitation of top-down profiling is the evidence on which it is based.
FBI profiling was developed using interviews with 36 murderers in the US - 25 of which were serial killers, the other 11 being single or double murderers. At the end of the process, 24 of these individuals were classified as organised offenders and 12 were disorganised. Canter et al. have argues that the sample was poor - FBI agents didn’t select a random or even a large sample nor did the sample include different kinds of offender. There was no standard set of questions so each interview was different and therefore not really comparable.
- Suggests top-down profiling doesn’t have a sound, scientific basis.
The bottom-up approach
Profilers work up from evidence collected from the crime scene to develop hypotheses about the likely characteristics, motivations and social background of the offender.
Investigative psychology
A form of bottom-up profiling that matches details from the crime scene with statistical analysis of typical offender behaviour patterns based on psychological theory.
Geographical profiling
A form of bottom-up profiling based on the principle of spatial consistency - that an offender’s operational base and possible future offences are revealed by the geographical location of their previous crimes.
One strength for investigative psychology is that evidence supports its use.
Canter and Heritage (1990) conducted an analysis of 66 sexual assault cases. The data was examined using smallest space analysis. Several behaviours were identified as common in different samples of behaviour, e.g. use of impersonal language and lack of reaction to the victim. Each individual displayed a characteristics pattern of such behaviours and this can help establish whether 2 or more offences were committed by the same person.
- supports one of the basic principle of investigative psychology (& bottom up approach) that people are consistent in their behaviour.
Another strength is evidence to support geographical profiling.
Lundrigan and Canter (2001) collated information from 120 murder cases involving serial killers in the US. Smallest space analysis revealed spatial consistency in behaviour of killers. The location of each body disposal site created a ‘centre of gravity’ presumably because when offenders start from their home base they may go in a different direction each time they dispose of a body, but in the end all these different sites create a circular effect around the home base. The effect was more noticeable for offenders who traveled short distances (marauders).
- supports view that geographical information can be used to identify an offender.
One limitation is that geographical profiling may not be sufficient on its own.
The success of geographical profiling may be reliant on the quality of data that the police can provide. Recording a crime is not always accurate, can vary between police forces and an estimated 75% of crimes aren’t even reported to police in the first place.
- Questions the utility of an approach that relies on the accuracy of geographical data. Even if the info is correct, critics claim other factors are just as important in creating a profile, e.g. timing and age and experience of offender.
- suggests that geographical info may not always lead to successful capture of an offender.
Atavistic form
A biological approach to offending that attributes criminal activity to the fact that offenders are genetic throwbacks or a primitive subspecies ill-suited to conforming to the rules of modern society. Such individuals are distinguishable by particular facial and cranial characteristics.
!876 - Lombroso wrote a book called ‘the criminal man’ in which he suggested that criminals are ‘genetic throwbacks’ -
a primitive subspecies who were biologically different from non-criminals.
- Today, Lombroso’s theory of atavistic form would best be described as speculative and naive.
Offenders were seen by Lombroso as lacking evolutionary development, their savage and untamed nature meant that…
they would find it impossible to adjust to the demands of civilised society and inevitably turn to crime.
- Lombroso saw offending behaviour as a natural tendency, rooted in genes of those who engage in it.
In terms of cranial (skull) characteristics, the atavistic form included…
narrow, sloping brow, a strong permanent jaw, high cheekbones and facial asymmetry.
- Other physical markers included dark skin and the existence of extra toes, nipples or fingers.
Besides physical traits, Lombroso suggested there were other aspects of the born offender including…
insensitivity to paint, use of slang, tattoos and unemployment.
Lombroso went on to categorise particular types of offender in terms of physical and facial characteristics; Murders and sexual deviants.
Murderers - bloodshot eyes, curly hair and long ears
Sexual deviants - glinting eyes, swollen, fleshy lips and projecting ears
One strength of Lombroso’s work is it changed the face of the study of crime.
He has been names the ‘father of modern criminology’. He also shifted the emphasis in crime research away from a moralistic discourse towards a more scientific position (evolutionary influences and genetics where individuals aren’t to blame).
- Influenced offender profiling as he was trying to describe how particular types of people are likely commit particular types of crime.
However, many critics, e.g. DeLisi (2012) have questioned whether Lombroso’s legacy is entirely positive.
Attention has been drawn to the racist undertones within Lombroso’s work. Many of the features that Lombroso identified as atavistic (curly hair, dark skin) are most likely to be found among people of African descent. He was basically suggesting that Africans were more likely to be offenders, a view that fitted 19th century eugenic attitudes.
- suggests that some aspects of this theory were highly subjective, influenced by racial prejudices of the time.
One limitation is evidence contradicts the link between atavism and crime.
Goring (1913) set out to establish whether there was anything physically atypical about offenders. After conducting a comparison between 3000 offenders and 3000 non-offenders he concluded that there was no evidence that offenders are a distinct group with unusual characteristics.
- Challenged idea that offenders can be physically distinguished from rest of population and unlikely to be a subspecies.
Genetics
genes consist of DNA strands. DNA produces ‘instructions’ for general physical features of an organism and also specific physical features. These may impact on psychological features (e.g. intelligence and mental disorder). Genes are transmitted from parents to offspring.
Neural explanation
Any explanation of behaviour in terms of (dys)functions of the brain and nervous system. This includes the activity of brain structures such as prefrontal cortex, and neurotransmitters such as serotonin.
Genetic explanations for crime suggest that…
would-be offenders inherit a gene, or combination of genes, that predispose them to commit crime.
The importance of genes is illustrated by twin studies.
Christiansen (1977) studies over 3500 twin pairs in Denmark, and found concordance rates for offender behaviour of 35% for MZ males and 13% for DZ males.
- Offender behaviour was checked against Denmark police records. This data indicates that it is not just the behaviour that might be inherited but the underlying predisposing traits.
Candidate genes - A genetic analysis of almost 800 Finnish offenders by Tiihonen et al. (2015) suggested that 2 genes (MAOA & CDH13) may be associated with violent crime.
MAOA gene regulates serotonin in the brain and has been linked to aggressive behaviour and the CDH13 gene has been linked to substance abuse and ADHD. The analysis found that about 5-10% of all severe violent crime in Finland is attributable to MAOA and CDH13 genotypes.
Diathesis-stress model
If genetics do have influence on offending, it seems likely that this is at least partly moderated by effects of environment.
- A tendency towards offending behaviour may come about through the combination of genetic predisposition and biological or psychological trigger.
Evidence suggests there may be neural differences in the brain of offenders and non offenders.
Most evidence in this area has involved individuals diagnosed with antisocial personality disorder. APD is associated with reduced emotional responses, a lack of empathy for the feelings of others and is a condition that characteristics many convicted offenders.
Adrian Rain conducted many studies of APD brain, reporting that there are many brain-imaging studies demonstrating that…
individuals with APD have reduced activity in prefrontal cortex (regulates emotional behaviour).
A limitation with using twin studies as genetic evidence is the assumption of equal environments.
It’s assumed by researchers studying twins that environmental factors are held constant because twins are brought up together and experience similar environments. However ‘shared environment’ assumption may apply more to MZ than DZ as MZ are identical and people tend to treat them more similarly, affecting their behaviour.
- higher concordance rates for MZ may simply be because they’re treated more similarly than DZ.
One strength is support for diathesis-stress model of offending.
A study of 13,000 Danish adoptees was conducted by Mednick et al. (1984). When neither bio nor adoptive parents had convictions, % of adoptees that did was 13.5%. This figure rose to 20% when either of bio parents had convictions, and 24.5% when both adoptive and bio had convictions.
- shows that genetic inheritance plays an important role in offending but environmental influence is clearly also important, providing support for diathesis-stress model of crime.
One strength of neural explanation is support for link between crime and frontal lobe.
Kandel and Freed (1989) reviewed evidence of frontal lobe damage and antisocial behaviour. People with damage tended to show impulsive behaviour, emotional instability and an inability to learn from their mistakes. The frontal lobe is associated with planning behaviour.
- This supports the idea that brain damage may be a causal factor in offending behaviour.
One limitation is the link between neural differences and APD may be complex.
Other factors may contribute to APD, and ultimately to offending. Farrington et al. (2006) studied a group of men who scored high on APD. They had experienced various risk factors during childhood, e.g. being raised by convicted parent and being physically neglected. It could be that these early childhood experiences caused APD and also some the neural differences associated with it - e.g. reduced activity in frontal lobe due to trauma.
- This suggests that the relationship between neural differences, APD and offending is complex and there may be other intervening variables that have an impact.
The crime personality
A feature of Eysenck’s theory of crime, and individual who scores highly on measures of extraversion, neuroticism and psychotics an can’t easily be conditioned, is cold and unfeeling, and is likely to engage in offending behaviour.
Eysenck was an important figure in personality and intelligence research during the middle of 20th century. 1947 - proposed that behaviour could be represented along 2 dimensions;
introversion-extraversion and neuroticism-stability. The 2 dimensions combine to form a variety of personality characteristics or traits.
- Eysenck later added psychotics-sociability.
Extraverts
- underachieve nervous system = constantly seek excitement, stimulation and likely to engage in risk-taking behaviour.
- tend not to condition easily and not learn from mistakes.
Neurotic
- high level of reactivity in sympathetic nervous system = respond quickly to situations of threat -> nervous, jumpy and overanxious.
- behaviour difficult to predict.
Psychotic
- high levels of testosterone
- unemotional, prone to aggression
