Taking Stock of Accuracy in Criminal Profiling: The Theoretical Quandary for Investigative Psychology

Kocsis, Richard N.; Middledorp, Jenny; Karpin, Anne

doi:10.1080/15228930802282006

Cited by 13 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 14 publications

(47 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The behaviors range from those related to involuntary stress and adrenalin symptoms to those more characteristic of “street craft,” or deliberate actions designed to facilitate a drug transaction and reduce the likelihood of being arrested by the police. This research, combined with the existing literature, indicates that with proper training and an understanding of the public space, it is possible for an individual to identify persons who may be carrying drugs or preparing to commit other crimes (Ault & Reese, 1980; Kocsis, 2006a, 2009, 2010, 2013; Kocsis et al, 2008; Pinizzotto & Finkel, 1990). The ability to identify who may be carrying drugs facilitates the interdiction and apprehension of offenders.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…These concerns are further complicated by myriad legal considerations that surround search and seizure in practice (Becton, 1986; Cloud, 1985; Wilson, 1996; Young, 1991), a full discussion of which is beyond the scope of this article. Focusing our review strictly to the empirical research on the effectiveness of profiling work, it is clear that many validation efforts have successfully demonstrated that training in profiling techniques can facilitate the identification of potential criminal offenders (Ault & Reese, 1980; Kocsis, 2006a, 2009, 2010, 2013; Kocsis, Middledorp, & Karpin, 2008; Pinizzotto & Finkel, 1990). These successful demonstrations are difficult to ignore; in numerous investigations, those trained in profiling techniques performed significantly better than untrained comparison groups in profiling tasks (in terms of number of correct predictions, overall accuracy, etc.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Behavioral Indicators of Drug Carrying in Open Spaces

Meehan

McClary²

2018

Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article identifies and describes a set of behavioral indicators associated with illegal drug carrying in public spaces. Through the use of focus group data, our research documents and translates the visual search techniques that veteran law enforcement and drugs experts report using in their work. Here, we catalogue these findings into 10 overarching categories, and discuss how each indicator may be incorporated into an officer's visual search. Knowledge of these indicators, when combined with proper training and an understanding of a public space, can help law enforcement identify persons who may be carrying drugs. The ability to identify drug-carrying individuals facilitates the interdiction and apprehension of offenders, and also protects the civil rights and liberties of the law-abiding public.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioral Indicators of Drug Carrying in Open Spaces

Meehan

McClary²

2018

Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A meta-analysis demonstrated that profilers are more accurate per se than non-profilers [16]. The same data was analysed in 2010 by Snook B et al [17] who found the opposite was true.…”

Section: Review Of Literaturementioning

confidence: 90%

Are Police Superior to Non-Police at Recognising Reliable Evidence? Are they More likely to Use Alternative Evidence?

Taylor¹

2017

FRCIJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sixty police and sixty non-police mock jurors read a fictitious transcript describing how an attempt at blowing up the Channel Tunnel was undertaken and how a bystander was injured by the fleeing culprit. The expert forensic and eyewitness (i.e., psychological) evidence presented in the transcript was either reliable or unreliable (such that there were four possible combinations). Two control transcripts contained expert forensic evidence only (reliable or unreliable). Police officers from Bridgend and Cardiff Central Police Forces and non-police solicited from the universities of Cardiff, South Wales and Sussex acted as 'mock' jurors and rated defendants for guilt and extent of guilt whilst considering evidence most influential in their decision-making. The aims of the current study are therefore to test whether police have a more informed understanding of the reliability and validity of both forensic and eyewitness evidence than non-police mock jurors and, that they are more sceptical of expert eyewitness testimony. The statistical analyses, MANOVA and Jonckheere, showed that police and nonpolice mock jurors have difficulty differentiating between reliable and unreliable evidence for the count of hitting the bystander. For the count of 'blowing up the tunnel', non-police mock jurors appear to be utilising evidence consistent with its reliability; however, MANOVA and Jonckheere analyses failed to demonstrate this statistically. Findings are accounted for by Hastie et al. [1]. 'Story Model' of how jurors interpret information and simplify meaning to help inform their verdicts.

show abstract

“…Clearly, the inability to show relationships between crime scene behaviours and offender characteristics, the basic tenet of offender profiling research (Goodwill, Alison, & Beech, ), is a significant problem for a field of research borne from this apparent goal (Canter, ), and to this end, criminal profiling has been heavily criticised (Kocsis, ; Snook, Cullen, Bennell, Taylor, & Gendreau, ). Therefore, one goal of the current study is to illustrate that, in the past, the lack of correspondence between crime scene behaviours and offender characteristics using FMDS methods may have been due to the methodology used, rather than theoretical or ideological failures, such as those suggested by Kocsis, Middledorp, and Karpin ().…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advancement of Criminal Profiling Methods in Faceted Multidimensional Analysis

Goodwill

Stephens

Oziel

et al. 2012

Journal Invest Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study seeks to advance the faceted multidimensional scaling (termed FMDS) procedure used in much of the investigative psychology research. To this end, recent research on street robbery by Goodwill and colleagues will be utilised to illustrate the effectiveness of a facet scale method for offender profiling. Four FMDS themes of street robbery (Con, Blitz, Confrontation and Snatch) were revealed by the crossing of two underlying axial facets: the offenders' level of violence and interaction with the victim. The facet scale method, utilising offenders' axial facet scores, was compared to previous count, proportional and centroid classification methods in the prediction of offender criminal histories. Utilising logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic analyses, the axial facet scale method was found to significantly outperform the qualitatively based dominant theme classification methods that typically employ angular and radial facets for FMDS interpretation. Implications for the use of axial facet scales within FMDS analysis for offender profiling research are discussed. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Taking Stock of Accuracy in Criminal Profiling: The Theoretical Quandary for Investigative Psychology

Cited by 13 publications

References 14 publications

Behavioral Indicators of Drug Carrying in Open Spaces

Behavioral Indicators of Drug Carrying in Open Spaces

Are Police Superior to Non-Police at Recognising Reliable Evidence? Are they More likely to Use Alternative Evidence?

Advancement of Criminal Profiling Methods in Faceted Multidimensional Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About