The Top - Down Approach

Question 1

What is offender profiling?

(ana. tool - inv. patt. frm CS - sugg. lik. A,B+P - unk. atkr.)

Answer 1

An analytical tool that involves using patterns from a crime scene to suggest the likely age, background and personality of an unknown attacker

Question 2

What are the two approaches to offender profiling?

(typ. appr. + dd appr.)

Answer 2

The typology approach (top down approach) and data - driven approach (bottom - up approach)

Question 3

What are the two categories the typology approach categorises offenders into?

Answer 3

Organised and disorganised

Question 4

Describe how the FBI’s typology approach to offender profiling works

(preex. - categ. - off. - d/o, match CS evi. w/ categ. - inf. chrcts. off. e.g. person)

Answer 4

Investigators start with the pre - existing categories of offenders, being disorganised or organised. They match evidence from the crime scene to one of these categories and from this infer the likely characteristics of the offenders like their personality

Question 5

What are the 4 key characteristics of an organised offenders?

1. plan + targets
2. control + lil evidence
3. smart + soc./sex. comp.

Answer 5

1. The crimes are planned with targeted victims
2. High level of control is maintained the during crime, so little evidence is left behind.
3. Have above average IQ and are socially and sexually competent

Question 6

What are four key characteristics of a disorganised offender?

(1. imp crim. - 2. intell. - 3. jobless - 4. sex. dysf. + fail. rs)

Answer 6

1. Often impulsive crimes, that are minimally planned
2. They have a lower IQ
3. Are unskilled and unemployed
4. Have history of sexual dysfunction and failed relationships

Question 7

Where do disorganised offenders often live in relation to the crime scene?

Answer 7

Relatively close to where the offence took place

Question 8

What are the four main stages in the construction of an FBI profile?

(DA, CSC, CR, PG)

Answer 8

1. Data assimilation
2. Crime scene classification
3. Crime reconstruction
4. Profile generation

Question 9

What happens during the data assimilation stage of FBI profiling?

(review of e. - e.g.?)

Answer 9

The profiler reviews the evidence, such as crime scene photographs and pathology reports

Question 10

What happens during the crime scene classification stage of FBI profiling?

Answer 10

The crime scene is classified as either organised or disorganised

Question 11

What occurs during the crime reconstruction stage of FBI profiling?

(hypo. - sequ. evnts. + behav. vic/off.)

Answer 11

The profiler creates hypotheses about the sequence of event and the behaviour of the victim and offender

Question 12

What occurs during the profile generation stage of FBI profiling?

(hypo - off. bckgrnd, phys. chrcts. + behav.)

Answer 12

Hypothesis is formed about the likely offender’s background, physical characteristics and behaviour

Question 13

At which stage of FBI profiling is the offender classified as organised or disorganised?

Answer 13

Crime scene classification stage

Question 14

What is a limitation of the top - down approach?

(lim. app, E.G. - CS - rev. imp. det. - susp - rape, more comm off. - burg. - no lend - prof. - res. CS - lil info. off, appr. lcks gen. + no ident. all off)

Answer 14

One limitation of the typology approach is it limited applicability. For example with crime scenes that reveal important details about the suspect, like crimes of rape. Offences that are more common, such as burglary, do not lend themselves to profiling because the resulting crime scene reveals very little about the offender. This shows this approach lacks generalisability and cannot identify all types of offenders

Question 15

What is a limitation of the typology approach?

(determ. nat, sys - assump. - off. patt. beha. + motiv. - consis. diff. cont, critics - inf. old. fash. mdls. person, behav. = determ. - no consid. pot. aff. ext. fact, red. val. = less app.)

Answer 15

Another limitation of the typology approach is its deterministic nature. The classification system is based on the assumption that offenders have patterns of behaviour and motivations that remain consistent across different contexts. Several critics have suggested this approach is informed by old fashioned models of personality. These models saw behaviour as being determined, not considering potential affects of external factors. This reduces the validity of the approach, making it less applicable

Question 16

What is a limitation of the top - down approach?

(lck. full. supp. disorg. off, Canter et al - ana 100. US murd. cases - +argu, insuff. evid. - supp. both categ, fndgs. - sugg. dist. org. off. type/ no disorg. type, critics - arg. - use of appr. - still use - US)

Answer 16

Another limitation is the approach lacks reliability and validity. Canter et al conducted an analysis of data from 100 US serial killers to support this argument. It was found that there was insufficient evidence to support both categories of offenders. The findings suggested evidence of a distinct organised offender type, which was not the case for the disorganised offender type. As a result, many critics have argued the use of the approach, yet it is still used in the US by professional profilers

Question 17

What is a strength of the typology approach?

(app. solv. crim. invest, Fox+Farrington - typo. appr. - inv. 405 burg. cases - const. own categ, taught police categ. + implement, 85% inc. - solved cases + red. crime occ, demons. appr = effec. solv. + prev. crime bey. seri. kilrs.)

Answer 17

One strength of the typology approach is its applicability in solving crime investigations. Fox and Farrington used the typology approach to investigate 405 burglary cases, constructing their own categories. They then taught police sectors these categories and had them implemented. An 85% increase was found in the number of cases solved and the number of crimes committed reduced. This demonstrates that the typology approach can be effective in solving and preventing crimes beyond serial killers

Question 18

Fox and Farrington (2012) developed a typology for offender profiles. Name two differences between this typology and the FBI’s original typology from the 1970s

(spec. criminals + categories used [O,D,INTP,O] + [O/D])

Answer 18

Fox and Farrington’s typology focuses on burglars, whereas the FBI’s typology focuses on serial killers.

Their research suggests that there are four unique types of burglar (organised, disorganised, interpersonal and opportunistic), whereas the FBI’s approach is limited to two types of offender (organised and disorganised).