topic AO1 AO3 AO3 AO3 AO3 AO3
Top-down Offender profiling > Ainsworth (2001): process of Research support limited use Oversimplified Flawed methodology Comparison with bottom-up
approach using all available info about a crime/crime Case of serial killer Approach is limited to crimes Canter et al (2004) argued FBI did not select a random/ Less scientific. BUA uses
scene/victim to compose a profile of the unknown Arthur Shawcross which leave signif evidence there are no distinct subsets large sample (opportunity). mathematical analysis and is
Offender profiling perpetrator. Used to help narrow down range of provides support. He and are multiple offences, of characteristics such as These volunteers were based on real life
potential suspects and prevent more crimes from carried murders in which are rare. This means organised/dis murders. He manipulative and so were facts/statistics, whilst
occurring. Offender profiling provides: 1988/9. The profile, there are few examples of analysed 100 murders and unreliable sources. The top-down fits people into
descriptions of characteristics of offender, based on 11 murders of successful profiles. When it found this dichotomy to be interviewers maintain that pre-established typologies.
including: social, physical, mental. Predictions women in NY state, was is used, findings show false. Following his criticism, they had had prior thorough
about when/where/ against whom they are likely of: lone male, 35, profiling rarely leads directly Holmes and Holmes (1998) briefings on crimes before
to commit next offence. 90% of profiling is used in unskilled job, own to offender. Douglas (1981) reclassified murders into 5 interviews. Were able to
murder/rape. Top-down developed in US by FBI. vehicle, police record, found that 15/192 cases lead categories: Disorganised detect any deception during
Approach involves: creation of general typologies and would return to to them finding offender. ‘visionary killer’, ‘Mission’, interview. Interviews were not
of criminal behaviour and motivation. Matching a crime scene to However, in 77% of cases it ‘Hedonistic’, ‘Lust’, standardised. Typologies
particular type of criminal to features of a re-experience pleasure was cited as being helpful as ‘Power/control killer’. Canter developed in an ‘intuitive’ and
particular crime. Focus on aspects of criminals of killing. Based on this it focused the investigation. (2004) criticised this revision informal
characteristic. profile: police set-up further. He reports that his manner.Classification was
In 1979, FBI interviewed 36 imprisoned serial surveillance around above analysis showed that based on offenders who had
killers. From these insights together with analysis body of 11th victim and features of the ‘power/ been caught. These offenders
of crime details, and intuition of experienced they caught him on a control’ killings were found in may differ significantly from
police officers, they created a classification nearby bridge. He was: over half sample. Therefore those who have remained ‘at
system for crimes. FBI distinguished between 2 44, cut salads, owned typical of most murders. So large’.
types of offender: organised and dis. an ex-police car, was on not a distinct type.
Analysis of crime scenes indicates type of parole for earlier child
offender based on these typologies. Classification murders. This practical
can be used to determine characteristics of application increases
offender > crime scene analysis. It means not all validity of approach.
crimes are suitable for profiling, such as
destruction of property, as they do not reveal
personality of offender.
Bottom-up Takes evidence/data from crime scene and builds Research support Research support More scientific Research support for GP issues
approach up profile until a reasonable conclusion about Canter (1994) used Canter’s profile of Adrian It is centered on statistical Canter and Lundrigan (2002) Kocsis (2002) examined
offender is reached. Typologies not involved and it BUA to identify railway Babb provides support. A analysis of evidence at crime collated info from 120 murder importance of investigative
Offender profiling relies on scientific principles- evidence from crime rapist. 1982-85 rapes serial rapist profiled by scene rather than based on cases involving serial killers experience by testing groups
scene over intuition about perpetrator. The two committed close to Canter 1994, arrested and intuitive reports from in US. Statistical analysis of detectives and undergrad
hallmarks are investigative psychology (apply railway stations. Then 3 found guilty of 7 rapes. unreliable criminals revealed signif geographical chem students on their ability
statistical procedures to analysis of crime scenes) women were killed Canter notices patterns in themselves. Therefore consistency in behaviour. The to successfully profile from a
and geographical profiling. through strangulation rapes. Perpetrator considered more valid if we offender’s base was found to real (closed) case.
BUA developed by Canter who studied crime after, and it seemed responded to discomfort of hold view that Psychology is be in centre of the pattern- Inexperienced students
scenes of 66 sexual assault cases (no interview). crimes were escalating. victims. One complained a Science and therefore all support for “centre of gravity” produced most accurate
This evidence revealed clusters of events that Canter used BUA to about cold concrete, of its methods should be theory. profiles of all groups,
commonly occur together, eg choice of and identify patterns in perpetrator responded put rigorous/rooted in science. consistently outperforming
interaction with victims including speech patterns/ perpetrator's behaviour. clothing on floor. Canter experienced detectives. There
content, location, and time of offence. By using Rapist formed argued these details was also some evidence of an
statistical analysis Canter developed ‘relationship’ with them, suggested rapist would be inverse relationship between
understanding of which factors might be showed them known as helpful/ investigative experience and
associated with each other and which were less consideration and used considerate. Babb was a profile accuracy. This could be
likely to be connected. Through statistic analysis minimal amount of well-regarded pool attendant, due to psychology of
he identified the following factors as being of force. Profile: sexually considerate member of schemas?
critical importance in BUA: Interpersonal experienced, late 20s, community. Shows how
coherence, time and place, criminal career, partner, semi-skilled job, effective BUA is when used
forensic awareness. little contact with in practice.
Geographical Profiling:suggests locations of crime women, arrested
are not random- familiarity important to offender. It before, lived in Kilburn,
is based on notion of schema theory/mental and knowledge of
mapping. The more crimes that have taken place London railway network.
in one area, the more effective this technique can John Duffy arrested. 29,
be. Pattern of offences is likely to form a ‘circle of carpenter who worked
, gravity’ around offender’s base. Canter proposed as a railway worker,
that there are 2 types of offenders from separated and had a
distribution: Commuters/marauders. Circle theory: criminal record for
pattern of offending is likely to form circle around raping her. Lived in
their usual residence. Kilburn. Shows how
effective BUA can be.
Atavistic form AF is historical approach used to explain criminal Contribution to Scientifically racist Contradictory evidence Alternative explanation Interactionist approach
behaviour, which is based on biological factors. criminology "father of Critics point out how racist Goring (1913) analysis of Kaplan (1980) with his This is an interactionist
Historical approach This explanation suggests some are born with a modern criminology". theory is, as features he 3000 criminals + 3000 non, ‘self-derogation’ theory which approach to understanding
criminal personality (eg it is innate) that is a He took emphasis away draws out such as dark and found no evidence that argues if an individual causes of behaviour. It argues
Biological throwback to a previous more primitive ancestor. from judging criminals skin/curly hair are criminals possess certain experiences persistent poor there is an interaction
explanation Lombroso (1876) examined facial/cranial features as wicked and started characteristics linked to facial/cranial characteristics interactions with others (in between biological aspects of
of 383 dead/3839 live Italian convicts. He hypothesising about African descent. His (though did propose link this case due to way they offender's appearance and the
proposed 40% of all criminal acts can be possible genetic/ description of atavistic form between low intelligence and look), they will develop lower way such individuals might be
accounted for by atavistic features. He argued evolutionary processes linked to "uncivilised, criminality). This research, self-esteem and increased treated. Lombroso's theory
criminals are not fully evolved- genetic that cause criminality. primitive" behaviour can be given it is close on historical frustration with others, suggests criminality is
throwbacks to a previous evolutionary state- a He has been credited linked to eugenics timeline, contradicts making them more likely to biological, but interactionist
primitive "sub-species". He argued criminals' for starting modern movement, which started Lombroso’s theory that commit criminal behaviour. approach suggests criminality
savage nature meant they would not be able to offender profiling with cousin of Darwin who physical traits can be linked is caused by both nature and
follow social norms of a civilised society and through linking physical put forward idea that not all to criminality. Furthermore, nurture.
would inevitably turn crime. He argued criminals features to types of people in society are born given that he used control, it
are born, and will possess certain features: large criminal. Paved way for equal: Only some cultural is more scientific and so
protruding jaws/low sloping foreheads/high further investigation into groups possess desirable more credible. Therefore, it
cheekbones/flattened noses/facial asymmetry/ evolutionary/biological traits such as intelligence/ is likely that Lombroso’s
dark skin/extra toes. He went on to categorise explanations. civility/morality, and these findings on physical features
particular types of criminal according to their groups with a genetic adv are coincidental and can be
physical characteristics. Murderers: Bloodshot should be allowed to breed found amongst any group of
eyes, curly hair, long ears. Sexual Deviants: for the good of humanity. that size.
Glinting eyes, swollen/fleshy lips, projecting ears.
Fraudsters: Thin and reedy lips.
Neural and genetic Genetic: 'Warrior gene' has been identified as Research support Implications Research support for role of research contradicting research support for neural
explanations being associated with violent crime, as it effects Brunner et al (1993) Some researchers believe amygdala Groves explanation
production of MAOA. MAOA is a chemical which case study which interaction between genes Groves and Schlesinger Wong (1997) found reduced Raine (1997) identified brain
Biological breaks down neurotransmitters such as supports warrior gene and environment is what can (1982) found that amygdala size and activity in regions specific to offenders
explanation serotonin/dopamine. Presence of gene disturbs theory. He studied bring out aggressive traits. amygdalectomy (surgical violent criminals. This charged with murder/manslau,
production of MAOA, resulting in abundance of family in Netherlands Warrior gene needs to be removal of amygdala) contradicts Groves, who who pleaded not guilty by
these neurotransmitters. causing aggression. with history of violent coupled with childhood reduces aggression in found removing amygdala reason of insanity. 41
Neural explanation - Evidence suggests there aggression in male line. trauma to determine previously violent removes violence. Wong murderers given PET scan to
may be neural differences in brains of criminals Results showed that aggression. In US 2007, man individuals. Supports idea found most violent criminals highlight areas of brain activity
and non. A current area of interest is amygdala warrior gene was facing death penalty had that amygdala plays role in had a smaller amygdala. and results compared to an
which is one of oldest parts of brain and is key in present (low levels of sentence reduced to aggressive behaviour. Therefore, exact role of age/gender matched control
ability to regulate emotion. Stimulation results in MAOA) in members of manslaughter because amygdala is still unclear, group. Results found reduced
violent behaviour, while lesions greatly reduce it. family, directly defence proved he carried however we do know that it activity for offender group in
Another area of interest is frontal lobes, which are supporting theory that warrior gene, and had history plays a role in aggressive areas such as prefrontal
part of neocortex (neo being "new" in an gene is implicated in of abuse. Revolutionary- behaviour. cortex + corpus callosum.
evolutionary sense), and have been linked to violent crime. never before had genetic There were also abnormalities
higher brain function such as social behaviours/ Stuart (2014) studied 97 evidence been used in in activity of amygdala. Shows
planning. men in treatment criminal justice system in this that violent offenders have
programme because way. Worrying implications-if abnormal brain function when
they assaulted their more evidence builds for compared to normal controls.
wives. Men with warrior genetic factors in aggression, Results suggest brains of
gene (low activity will more violent criminals offenders are slowed and
MAOA gene) were most have their sentences unable to make swift decisions
violent. altered? Free will? to react appropriately in
certain situations, or consider
consequences of actions to
control their behaviour.
Eysenck’s theory Eysenck (1947) proposed criminals possess Research support Research refuting Implications Cultural issues Methodological issues
Top-down Offender profiling > Ainsworth (2001): process of Research support limited use Oversimplified Flawed methodology Comparison with bottom-up
approach using all available info about a crime/crime Case of serial killer Approach is limited to crimes Canter et al (2004) argued FBI did not select a random/ Less scientific. BUA uses
scene/victim to compose a profile of the unknown Arthur Shawcross which leave signif evidence there are no distinct subsets large sample (opportunity). mathematical analysis and is
Offender profiling perpetrator. Used to help narrow down range of provides support. He and are multiple offences, of characteristics such as These volunteers were based on real life
potential suspects and prevent more crimes from carried murders in which are rare. This means organised/dis murders. He manipulative and so were facts/statistics, whilst
occurring. Offender profiling provides: 1988/9. The profile, there are few examples of analysed 100 murders and unreliable sources. The top-down fits people into
descriptions of characteristics of offender, based on 11 murders of successful profiles. When it found this dichotomy to be interviewers maintain that pre-established typologies.
including: social, physical, mental. Predictions women in NY state, was is used, findings show false. Following his criticism, they had had prior thorough
about when/where/ against whom they are likely of: lone male, 35, profiling rarely leads directly Holmes and Holmes (1998) briefings on crimes before
to commit next offence. 90% of profiling is used in unskilled job, own to offender. Douglas (1981) reclassified murders into 5 interviews. Were able to
murder/rape. Top-down developed in US by FBI. vehicle, police record, found that 15/192 cases lead categories: Disorganised detect any deception during
Approach involves: creation of general typologies and would return to to them finding offender. ‘visionary killer’, ‘Mission’, interview. Interviews were not
of criminal behaviour and motivation. Matching a crime scene to However, in 77% of cases it ‘Hedonistic’, ‘Lust’, standardised. Typologies
particular type of criminal to features of a re-experience pleasure was cited as being helpful as ‘Power/control killer’. Canter developed in an ‘intuitive’ and
particular crime. Focus on aspects of criminals of killing. Based on this it focused the investigation. (2004) criticised this revision informal
characteristic. profile: police set-up further. He reports that his manner.Classification was
In 1979, FBI interviewed 36 imprisoned serial surveillance around above analysis showed that based on offenders who had
killers. From these insights together with analysis body of 11th victim and features of the ‘power/ been caught. These offenders
of crime details, and intuition of experienced they caught him on a control’ killings were found in may differ significantly from
police officers, they created a classification nearby bridge. He was: over half sample. Therefore those who have remained ‘at
system for crimes. FBI distinguished between 2 44, cut salads, owned typical of most murders. So large’.
types of offender: organised and dis. an ex-police car, was on not a distinct type.
Analysis of crime scenes indicates type of parole for earlier child
offender based on these typologies. Classification murders. This practical
can be used to determine characteristics of application increases
offender > crime scene analysis. It means not all validity of approach.
crimes are suitable for profiling, such as
destruction of property, as they do not reveal
personality of offender.
Bottom-up Takes evidence/data from crime scene and builds Research support Research support More scientific Research support for GP issues
approach up profile until a reasonable conclusion about Canter (1994) used Canter’s profile of Adrian It is centered on statistical Canter and Lundrigan (2002) Kocsis (2002) examined
offender is reached. Typologies not involved and it BUA to identify railway Babb provides support. A analysis of evidence at crime collated info from 120 murder importance of investigative
Offender profiling relies on scientific principles- evidence from crime rapist. 1982-85 rapes serial rapist profiled by scene rather than based on cases involving serial killers experience by testing groups
scene over intuition about perpetrator. The two committed close to Canter 1994, arrested and intuitive reports from in US. Statistical analysis of detectives and undergrad
hallmarks are investigative psychology (apply railway stations. Then 3 found guilty of 7 rapes. unreliable criminals revealed signif geographical chem students on their ability
statistical procedures to analysis of crime scenes) women were killed Canter notices patterns in themselves. Therefore consistency in behaviour. The to successfully profile from a
and geographical profiling. through strangulation rapes. Perpetrator considered more valid if we offender’s base was found to real (closed) case.
BUA developed by Canter who studied crime after, and it seemed responded to discomfort of hold view that Psychology is be in centre of the pattern- Inexperienced students
scenes of 66 sexual assault cases (no interview). crimes were escalating. victims. One complained a Science and therefore all support for “centre of gravity” produced most accurate
This evidence revealed clusters of events that Canter used BUA to about cold concrete, of its methods should be theory. profiles of all groups,
commonly occur together, eg choice of and identify patterns in perpetrator responded put rigorous/rooted in science. consistently outperforming
interaction with victims including speech patterns/ perpetrator's behaviour. clothing on floor. Canter experienced detectives. There
content, location, and time of offence. By using Rapist formed argued these details was also some evidence of an
statistical analysis Canter developed ‘relationship’ with them, suggested rapist would be inverse relationship between
understanding of which factors might be showed them known as helpful/ investigative experience and
associated with each other and which were less consideration and used considerate. Babb was a profile accuracy. This could be
likely to be connected. Through statistic analysis minimal amount of well-regarded pool attendant, due to psychology of
he identified the following factors as being of force. Profile: sexually considerate member of schemas?
critical importance in BUA: Interpersonal experienced, late 20s, community. Shows how
coherence, time and place, criminal career, partner, semi-skilled job, effective BUA is when used
forensic awareness. little contact with in practice.
Geographical Profiling:suggests locations of crime women, arrested
are not random- familiarity important to offender. It before, lived in Kilburn,
is based on notion of schema theory/mental and knowledge of
mapping. The more crimes that have taken place London railway network.
in one area, the more effective this technique can John Duffy arrested. 29,
be. Pattern of offences is likely to form a ‘circle of carpenter who worked
, gravity’ around offender’s base. Canter proposed as a railway worker,
that there are 2 types of offenders from separated and had a
distribution: Commuters/marauders. Circle theory: criminal record for
pattern of offending is likely to form circle around raping her. Lived in
their usual residence. Kilburn. Shows how
effective BUA can be.
Atavistic form AF is historical approach used to explain criminal Contribution to Scientifically racist Contradictory evidence Alternative explanation Interactionist approach
behaviour, which is based on biological factors. criminology "father of Critics point out how racist Goring (1913) analysis of Kaplan (1980) with his This is an interactionist
Historical approach This explanation suggests some are born with a modern criminology". theory is, as features he 3000 criminals + 3000 non, ‘self-derogation’ theory which approach to understanding
criminal personality (eg it is innate) that is a He took emphasis away draws out such as dark and found no evidence that argues if an individual causes of behaviour. It argues
Biological throwback to a previous more primitive ancestor. from judging criminals skin/curly hair are criminals possess certain experiences persistent poor there is an interaction
explanation Lombroso (1876) examined facial/cranial features as wicked and started characteristics linked to facial/cranial characteristics interactions with others (in between biological aspects of
of 383 dead/3839 live Italian convicts. He hypothesising about African descent. His (though did propose link this case due to way they offender's appearance and the
proposed 40% of all criminal acts can be possible genetic/ description of atavistic form between low intelligence and look), they will develop lower way such individuals might be
accounted for by atavistic features. He argued evolutionary processes linked to "uncivilised, criminality). This research, self-esteem and increased treated. Lombroso's theory
criminals are not fully evolved- genetic that cause criminality. primitive" behaviour can be given it is close on historical frustration with others, suggests criminality is
throwbacks to a previous evolutionary state- a He has been credited linked to eugenics timeline, contradicts making them more likely to biological, but interactionist
primitive "sub-species". He argued criminals' for starting modern movement, which started Lombroso’s theory that commit criminal behaviour. approach suggests criminality
savage nature meant they would not be able to offender profiling with cousin of Darwin who physical traits can be linked is caused by both nature and
follow social norms of a civilised society and through linking physical put forward idea that not all to criminality. Furthermore, nurture.
would inevitably turn crime. He argued criminals features to types of people in society are born given that he used control, it
are born, and will possess certain features: large criminal. Paved way for equal: Only some cultural is more scientific and so
protruding jaws/low sloping foreheads/high further investigation into groups possess desirable more credible. Therefore, it
cheekbones/flattened noses/facial asymmetry/ evolutionary/biological traits such as intelligence/ is likely that Lombroso’s
dark skin/extra toes. He went on to categorise explanations. civility/morality, and these findings on physical features
particular types of criminal according to their groups with a genetic adv are coincidental and can be
physical characteristics. Murderers: Bloodshot should be allowed to breed found amongst any group of
eyes, curly hair, long ears. Sexual Deviants: for the good of humanity. that size.
Glinting eyes, swollen/fleshy lips, projecting ears.
Fraudsters: Thin and reedy lips.
Neural and genetic Genetic: 'Warrior gene' has been identified as Research support Implications Research support for role of research contradicting research support for neural
explanations being associated with violent crime, as it effects Brunner et al (1993) Some researchers believe amygdala Groves explanation
production of MAOA. MAOA is a chemical which case study which interaction between genes Groves and Schlesinger Wong (1997) found reduced Raine (1997) identified brain
Biological breaks down neurotransmitters such as supports warrior gene and environment is what can (1982) found that amygdala size and activity in regions specific to offenders
explanation serotonin/dopamine. Presence of gene disturbs theory. He studied bring out aggressive traits. amygdalectomy (surgical violent criminals. This charged with murder/manslau,
production of MAOA, resulting in abundance of family in Netherlands Warrior gene needs to be removal of amygdala) contradicts Groves, who who pleaded not guilty by
these neurotransmitters. causing aggression. with history of violent coupled with childhood reduces aggression in found removing amygdala reason of insanity. 41
Neural explanation - Evidence suggests there aggression in male line. trauma to determine previously violent removes violence. Wong murderers given PET scan to
may be neural differences in brains of criminals Results showed that aggression. In US 2007, man individuals. Supports idea found most violent criminals highlight areas of brain activity
and non. A current area of interest is amygdala warrior gene was facing death penalty had that amygdala plays role in had a smaller amygdala. and results compared to an
which is one of oldest parts of brain and is key in present (low levels of sentence reduced to aggressive behaviour. Therefore, exact role of age/gender matched control
ability to regulate emotion. Stimulation results in MAOA) in members of manslaughter because amygdala is still unclear, group. Results found reduced
violent behaviour, while lesions greatly reduce it. family, directly defence proved he carried however we do know that it activity for offender group in
Another area of interest is frontal lobes, which are supporting theory that warrior gene, and had history plays a role in aggressive areas such as prefrontal
part of neocortex (neo being "new" in an gene is implicated in of abuse. Revolutionary- behaviour. cortex + corpus callosum.
evolutionary sense), and have been linked to violent crime. never before had genetic There were also abnormalities
higher brain function such as social behaviours/ Stuart (2014) studied 97 evidence been used in in activity of amygdala. Shows
planning. men in treatment criminal justice system in this that violent offenders have
programme because way. Worrying implications-if abnormal brain function when
they assaulted their more evidence builds for compared to normal controls.
wives. Men with warrior genetic factors in aggression, Results suggest brains of
gene (low activity will more violent criminals offenders are slowed and
MAOA gene) were most have their sentences unable to make swift decisions
violent. altered? Free will? to react appropriately in
certain situations, or consider
consequences of actions to
control their behaviour.
Eysenck’s theory Eysenck (1947) proposed criminals possess Research support Research refuting Implications Cultural issues Methodological issues
