, work up on evidence from crime scene to develop start from pre-established typology and work
hypothesis of likely characteristics and down to assign offenders into 2 categories
motivations of offender. based on witnesses and evidence.
Investigative Psychology Categories of Offender
matches details from crime scene with statistical analysis of Organised Disorganised
typical offender behviour patterns using psychological theory. show evidence planning, target show little evidence planning,
- establishes behaviours likely to occur the victim, tend to be socially leaves clues, tend to be socially
- develops statistical database for baseline comparison and sexually competent, higher and sexually incompetent with
- details from offence compared to database to reveal than averge intelligence lower than average intelligence
characteristics of the offender, may determine whether series of
offences are linked to the same offender Construting FBI profile
Geographical Profiling
Rossmo 1997: based on spatial consistency, offender’s operational
base + possible future offences revealed by geogrphical location Not for all crimes
of previous crimes Based on 36 interviews from American serial killers with
- also known as crime mapping sexual motives. These crimes are more suited to explain
- can create hypothesis about how offender thinks scenes that reveal details about suspect while common
- theory suggests retriction of crimes to familiar areas
offences like burglary, vandalism, murder/assault reveal
- provides centre of gravity for investigators, likely to include
little about offender. Limited approach
operational base
- educational guesses of next crime place “jeoprady surface” Based on outdated personality models
Typology classification based on consistent behaviours
Canter+Larkin 1993: and motivations of offenders. Alison et al 2002: naive
approach based on old fashioned personalities which
change overtime.
Low in validity
Opposing evidence
Canter et al 2004: analysed data from 100 US murders.
Details examined referenced 39 characteristics typical
of organised and disorganised killers. Findings suggested
Supporting evidence investigative psychology evidence for organised type but not disorganised,
Canter+Heritage 1990: content analysis of 66 SA cases. undermines whole classification system.
Computer programme assessed correlations between Supporting evidence
behaviour patterns. Characteristsics like impersonal Research into the top down approach shows that when
reaction & lack of reaction to victim were common. US officers were trained on 405 burglaries with
Understand changing behaviour overtime/identify significant correlations between the aspects of the
offender of several crimes. However, only for sexually crime and 4 offender profiles (organised v disorganised
motivated crimes so limited application and interpersonal v opportunistic), the force was able to
Supporting evidence geographical profiling successfully solve 85% more burglaries
Canter+Lundrigan 2001: collated info of 120 murders from US
serial killers. Different locations created ‘centre of gravity’ with
offender’s base in the middle. Effect more noticeable for
maurauders so limited approach
Scientific Basis
More objective than top down due to evidence and psychological
theory. AI helps invetigators manipulate geographical,
biographical & psychological data quickly for investigative
psychology insights. Investigative psych expanded, including
suspect interviews and material examination in court
hypothesis of likely characteristics and down to assign offenders into 2 categories
motivations of offender. based on witnesses and evidence.
Investigative Psychology Categories of Offender
matches details from crime scene with statistical analysis of Organised Disorganised
typical offender behviour patterns using psychological theory. show evidence planning, target show little evidence planning,
- establishes behaviours likely to occur the victim, tend to be socially leaves clues, tend to be socially
- develops statistical database for baseline comparison and sexually competent, higher and sexually incompetent with
- details from offence compared to database to reveal than averge intelligence lower than average intelligence
characteristics of the offender, may determine whether series of
offences are linked to the same offender Construting FBI profile
Geographical Profiling
Rossmo 1997: based on spatial consistency, offender’s operational
base + possible future offences revealed by geogrphical location Not for all crimes
of previous crimes Based on 36 interviews from American serial killers with
- also known as crime mapping sexual motives. These crimes are more suited to explain
- can create hypothesis about how offender thinks scenes that reveal details about suspect while common
- theory suggests retriction of crimes to familiar areas
offences like burglary, vandalism, murder/assault reveal
- provides centre of gravity for investigators, likely to include
little about offender. Limited approach
operational base
- educational guesses of next crime place “jeoprady surface” Based on outdated personality models
Typology classification based on consistent behaviours
Canter+Larkin 1993: and motivations of offenders. Alison et al 2002: naive
approach based on old fashioned personalities which
change overtime.
Low in validity
Opposing evidence
Canter et al 2004: analysed data from 100 US murders.
Details examined referenced 39 characteristics typical
of organised and disorganised killers. Findings suggested
Supporting evidence investigative psychology evidence for organised type but not disorganised,
Canter+Heritage 1990: content analysis of 66 SA cases. undermines whole classification system.
Computer programme assessed correlations between Supporting evidence
behaviour patterns. Characteristsics like impersonal Research into the top down approach shows that when
reaction & lack of reaction to victim were common. US officers were trained on 405 burglaries with
Understand changing behaviour overtime/identify significant correlations between the aspects of the
offender of several crimes. However, only for sexually crime and 4 offender profiles (organised v disorganised
motivated crimes so limited application and interpersonal v opportunistic), the force was able to
Supporting evidence geographical profiling successfully solve 85% more burglaries
Canter+Lundrigan 2001: collated info of 120 murders from US
serial killers. Different locations created ‘centre of gravity’ with
offender’s base in the middle. Effect more noticeable for
maurauders so limited approach
Scientific Basis
More objective than top down due to evidence and psychological
theory. AI helps invetigators manipulate geographical,
biographical & psychological data quickly for investigative
psychology insights. Investigative psych expanded, including
suspect interviews and material examination in court
