4 Critical Assumptions for Offender Profiling – Factual?

4) Cross-Situational Consistency – Crime behaviours should reflect more “normal” behaviour.

This assumption suggests that crime is just an extreme version of every day behaviour. However, in non-forensic settings there is little evidence of cross-situational consistency, apart from between cognitive and intellectual functioning (Mischel, 1968). Walters (2000) did, however, find that the more similar two situations, the more consistent the use of aggression. Also, Daffern et al (2009) looked at aggression used by offenders in their offences, and also in hospital during in-patient treatment. They found for some offenders there was a similarity in aggression used across these situations, but this was not the case for all offenders. It seems then, cross-situational consistency is not a very valid assumption, apart from possibly around aggression. This again casts doubt on the validity of offender profiling.

In conclusion, there is doubt surrounding the assumptions that underlie offender profiling. This throws the whole idea of offender profiling into question. However, this area has not been researched very heavily, and better conducted studies are needed. Until then, profiling should be taken with a pinch of salt, and we must keep in mind it is not as perfect as it is shown to be in the media. What do you think, do we need more research before we judge? Or should we give up on the practise of offender profiling?

Edited by: Zoe

References

Ainsworth, P. B. (2000). Crime analysis and offender profiling. Psychology and crime: Myths and reality, 102-120.

Bennell C, Jones NJ, Melnyk T (2009) Addressing problems with traditional crime linking methods using receiver operating characteristic analysis. Leg Criminol Psychol 14:293–310. doi:10.1348/135532508X349336

Daffern, M., Howells, K., Mannion, A., & Tonkin, M. (2009). A test of methodology intended to assist detection of aggressive offence paralleling behaviour within secure settings. Legal and criminological psychology, 14(2), 213-226.

Ellingwood, H., Mugford, R., Bennell, C., Melnyk, T., & Fritzon, K. (2013). Examining the role of similarity coefficients and the value of behavioural themes in attempts to link serial arson offences. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 10(1), 1-27.

Goodwill, A. M., & Alison, L. J. (2007). When is profiling possible? Offense planning and aggression as moderators in predicting offender age from victim age in stranger rape. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 25(6), 823-840.

Mischel, W. (1968). Personality and assessmentWiley. New York.

Mokros, A., & Alison, L. J. (2002). Is offender profiling possible? Testing the predicted homology of crime scene actions and background characteristics in a sample of rapists. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 7(1), 25-43.

Woodhams J, Toye K (2007) An empirical test of the assumptions of case linkage and offender profiling with serial commercial robberies. Psychol, Public Policy Law 13:59–85.