forensic psychology Flashcards
cognitive explanations - ao1
offender profiling (top down approach) - ao1
offender profiling is a tool used by the police to narrow down the list of likely suspects for a crime, based on the idea that the characteristics of the offender can be deduced from details of the offence and crime scene
top down approach consists of templates of an organised and disorganised offender that are pre-existing in the mind of the profiler, evidence is used from the crime, victim, context to fit the offender into one of two pre-existing categories
organised offenders:
show evidence of planning in advance
victim deliberately targeted because of a certain preference of the perpetrators
maintains a high level of control during the crime
little evidence left behind at crime scene
tend to be above average intelligence, skilled, professional occupation and are socially/sexually competent
often married with children
disorganised offenders:
show little evidence of planning in advance
offence likely was spontaneous
crime scene reflects the impulsive nature of the attack
body usually left at scene
evidence of offender having little control
tends to be of lower than average intelligence, unskilled work/unemployed, often have history of sexual dysfunction or failed relationships
tend to live alone and often relatively close to location of crime
offender profiling (top down approach) - ao3
- only applies to certain major crimes (eg rape, arson, cult killings, murder, those that include sadistic torture), common crimes like burglary do not allow for top down profiling because the crime scene reveals very little about offender
- organised and disorganised templates were developed based on interviews with 36 killers in the US, can be criticised because based off an unrepresentative sample
- the serial killers interviewed were all sexually motivated such as ted bundy and charles manson, canter argues invalid to rely on self report data from convicted serial killers
offender profiling (bottom up approach) - ao1
developed in the uk with an aim to generate a picture of the offender, including likely characteristics,routine behaviour and social background through routine analysis of evidence left at crime scene.
profile is data driven rather than based on templates
two hallmarks are investigative psychology and geographical profiling
investigative psychology:
a statistical database is established where all crimes and behaviours at crimes are recorded within
specific details of an offence can then be matched against the database in order to reveal statistically probable details about the offender (eg history, family background), can also help determine whether multiple crimes are linked by same offender
also finds significance in time or place which could indicate method of transport, location of offender
another branch of investigative psychology is interpersonal coherence whereby the offender behaves similar at the crime scene as they do in their everyday life allowing psychologists to use behaviours found at crime scenes to help profile the offender
geographical profiling:
study of spatial behaviour in relation to crime and offender
focuses on location of crime as a clue to where the offender lives, works and socialises
data used would include local crime stats, local transport, geographical spread of similar crimes.
theory is based upon the assumption that serious offenders will restrict their criminal activity to an area they are familiar with meaning offenders base location will be in the middle of the spatial pattern of their crimes
canter and larkin proposed two models of offender behaviour- marauder (operates c,ose to home) and commuter (traveled a distance away from home)
offender profiling (bottom up approach) - ao3
+will work on less major and more major crimes allowing for a wider variety of offences such as burglary and theft to be investigated meaning more offenders will be caught
+canter argues that is it more scientific and objective than top down as it is more grounded in evidence due to being data driven rather than using pre-existing templates and speculation
- kocsis et all (2002) found that chemistry students produced a more accurate offender profile than experienced senior detectives.
