forensics ; offender profiling ; top-down approach

HideShow resource information
TOP-DOWN APPROACH
DGDFG
1 of 84
- offender profiling
dgdfg
2 of 84
what is offender profiling?
investigative tool employed by police when solving crimes
3 of 84
what is the main aim of offender profiling?
narrow field of enquiry and list of likely suspects
4 of 84
who will be called to work alongside police esp in high profile cases?
professional profilers
5 of 84
methods vary but compiling profile will usually involve which two things?
scrutiny of crime scee / analysis of evidence
6 of 84
in order to do what?
generate hypothesis about probable characteristics of the offender
7 of 84
- american approach
dfgdfg
8 of 84
top-down originally from us as result of?
fbi work in 70s
9 of 84
more specifically fbi behavioural science unit drew upon data gethere from wht?
in-depth interviews
10 of 84
with how many sexually motivated serial killers?
36
11 of 84
including which two high profile cases?
ted bundy / charles manson
12 of 84
what is the top-down approach also known as?
typology approach
13 of 84
offender proflers who use this method will match what is known about the crime and offender to what?
pre-existing template the FBI developed
14 of 84
murderers and rapists classified into one of which two categories?
organised / disorganised
15 of 84
on what basis
evidence
16 of 84
and this classification informs what?
the subsequent police investigation
17 of 84
- organised and disorganised types of offender
dfgdfg
18 of 84
this distinction is based on what idea?
that serious offenders have certain signature ways of working
19 of 84
and these generally correlate with what?
particular set of social / psych characteristics
20 of 84
+ organised offenders
dgdfg
21 of 84
show evidence of having done what?
planned in advance
22 of 84
victim deliberately targeted and will often reflect?
fact killer / ****** has a 'type'
23 of 84
maintain high degree of what during crime?
ctrl
24 of 84
and may operate with?
most detached surgical precision
25 of 84
what is there litte of left @ scene?
evidence / clues
26 of 84
tend to be abve-avg?
intelligent
27 of 84
in what kind of occupation?
skilled, professional
28 of 84
and are competent in which two ways?
socially / sexually
29 of 84
usually what kind of home life?
married sometimes with children
30 of 84
+ disorganised offenders
sdgdf
31 of 84
show little evidence of?
planning
32 of 84
suggesting offence to be?
spontaneous spur of the moment act
33 of 84
crime scene tends to reflect what?
impulsive nature of attack
34 of 84
what usually left @ scene?
body
35 of 84
and appears to have been v little what on part of offender?
ctrl
36 of 84
tend to have lower than average?
iq
37 of 84
be in what kind of work?
unskilled / unemployed
38 of 84
and often hav history of?
sexual dysfunction / failed relationships
39 of 84
tend to have whay kind of homelife?
live alone
40 of 84
and often live where proxemically?
relatively close to where offence took place
41 of 84
- constructing FBI profile
dgd
42 of 84
how many stages?
four
43 of 84
stage one is?
data assimilation
44 of 84
where profiler does what?
reviews evidence
45 of 84
then?
crime scene classification
46 of 84
as either?
organised / disorganised
47 of 84
then?
crime reconstruction
48 of 84
hypotheses in terms of?
sequence of events / victim behaviour etx
49 of 84
and finally?
profile regeneration
50 of 84
hypotheses related to?
likely offender like demographic bckg / phys characteristics / behaviour etc
51 of 84
EVALUATION
DFFGDF
52 of 84
:( only applies to particular crimes
gdgd
53 of 84
best suited to what kind of crimes?
those that reveal important details about the suspect like **** / arson / cult kill
54 of 84
and crimes that involve macabre practices like?
sadistic torture / body dissection / acting out fantasies
55 of 84
why do more common offences like burglary not lend themselves to profiling?
resulting crime scene reveals v little about offender
56 of 84
this means at best it is a limited approach to?
identifying a criminal
57 of 84
:( based on outdated models of personality
dfgfdg
58 of 84
typology classification system based on what assumption?
that offenders have patterns of behaviour and motivations that remain consistent across situations and contexts
59 of 84
what have severeal critics suggested about thsis approach?
naive and informed by old fashioned models of personality
60 of 84
these models see behaviour as being driven by what?
stable dispositional traits
61 of 84
rather than?
external factors that may be constantly chanigng
62 of 84
top-down approach is based on what kind of personality models?
static ones
63 of 84
means its likely to have poor validity when it comes to what?
identifying possible suspects and/or trying to predict next move
64 of 84
:( evidence doesn't support disorganised offender
dgdfg
65 of 84
canter analysed data from how many usa murders?
100
66 of 84
using qwhat technique?
smallest space analysis
67 of 84
details of each case examied w/ reference to how many characteristics thought to be typical of dis/org killers?
39
68 of 84
findings suggested evidence of distinct wht type?
organised
69 of 84
but not case for disorganised which seems to undermine?
classification system as a whole
70 of 84
evertheless what still continues about dis/organised distinction?
still used as model for professional profilers in us w/ widespread supportso they're dumb
71 of 84
EVALUATION EXTRA
EGFG
72 of 84
:( classification too simplistic
dfgfdg
73 of 84
behaviours aren't mutually exclusive meaning?
combination could occurr at any murder scene
74 of 84
for instance what does godwin ask?
how police investigators would classify killer with high intelligence and sexual competence who commits spontenaous murder
75 of 84
this prompted other researchers to propose what?
more detailed typological models
76 of 84
holmes suggests there are four types of killer which are?
visionary / mission / hedonistic / power and ctrl
77 of 84
while keppel and walter choose to focus more on what than determining types?
different motivations killer may have
78 of 84
:( original sample
dfgdfg
79 of 84
developed using interviews with how many us killers?
36
80 of 84
how many of these serial killers?
25
81 of 84
and single / double murderers?
11
82 of 84
critics have pointed out what about this sample?
too small / unrepresentative to base typology system that may have sig inf on police inv
83 of 84
canter also argued it's not sensible to rely on what kind of data when constructing classification system?
self-report data with convicted killers (though that should have just been a given)
84 of 84

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

- offender profiling

Back

dgdfg

Card 3

Front

what is offender profiling?

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

what is the main aim of offender profiling?

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

who will be called to work alongside police esp in high profile cases?

Back

Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all forensics resources »