Forensic Psychology : L1 Top-Down Approach Offender Profiling

Question 1

Top-down approach to offender profiling

Answer 1

a tool employed by the police to narrow down the list of likely suspects for a crime/crimes

Offender profiling is based on the idea that characteristics of the offender can be deduced from details of the offence and crime scene

Profile methods usually involve careful scrutiny of the crime scene and analysis of evidence in order to generate a hypothesis about the probable characteristics of the offender (e.g. age, occupation etc.)

Question 2

What is the top down approach

Answer 2

Evidence from the crime scene and other details of the incident are used to fit the offender into two of the pre-existing categories in the mind of the profiler

these are oganised and disorganised offenders

Question 3

Organised offenders:

Answer 3

These offenders:
- Show evidence of planning the crime in advance, meaning the victim was deliberately targeted

• Maintains a high level of control during the crime, where little evidence is left behind at the scene
• Tend to be above average intelligence, in a skilled, professional occupation and are socially and sexually competent. They are often married with children

Question 4

Disorganised offender

Answer 4

These offenders:
- Show little evidence of planning, where the offence may have been spontaneous

• Little control shown, where the crime scene tends to reflect the impulsive nature of the attack, and the body is usually left at the scene
• Tend to be below average intelligence, be in unskilled work or unemployed, and often have a history of sexual dysfunction and failed relationships. They tend to live alone and close to the crime scene

Question 5

Top down approach evaluation (5 negative)

Answer 5

• Top-down profiling only applies to certain crimes (e.g. rape, arson, murders etc.) Top down approach is not effective for common offences, such as burglary as there is little revealed at the crime scene about the offender
• The organised or disorganised distinction was developed based on interviews with 36 serial killers in the USA. The approach has been criticised for the sample being too small and unrepresentative upon which to base a typology system
• Top-down profiling was developed based on interviews with 36 sexually motivated serial killers, including Ted Bundy and Charles Manson. It has been argued that it is not valid to rely on self-report data from convicted serial killers when constructing a classification system
• The organised or disorganised distinction is too simplistic. Holmes suggested that there are four types of serial killers ; visionary, mission, hedonistic and power serial killers which all have different motives for why they kill which the top-down approach does not identify
• Canter (2004) analysed data from 100 murders in the USA with reference to the typical characteristics of organised and disorganised killers. The findings only showed a distinct organised type, undermining the entire classification system