A03: The Top-Down Approach - Offender Profiling

• A03 Evaluation of the Top-Down Approach

  +Research in support (Canter et al 2004)

  -Evidence for it is flawed & there is a lack of theoretical foundation to this approach

  -Overly Simplistic (Godwin 2002) (Holmes 1989)

  -Not applicable to all types of crime

  + HOWEVER: can be adapted to other types of crime (Meketa 2017)
• Lack of theoretical foundation & Flawed TDA A03


  P: Canter 2004 argues use of self report data (e.g. interviews of serial killers) not sensible to use when constructing a classification system on typologies as often relies on anecdotal evidence rather than robust research.

  E: Also argues FBI agents didn't select a random or even large sample, nor did it include different kinds of offender.

  There no standard set of questions so each interview different & thus not comparable.

  L: Suggests top-down profiling doesn't have a sound scientific basis, reducing the credibility & validity of approach
• Overly Simplistic - TDA A03

  Distinction made: oversimplification/restrictive

  Likely offenders not fit neatly into either typ as behaviour not mutually exclusive

  • Godwin 2002 asked 'how would police classify killer with high intelligence who committed spontaneous crime?'. Argues in reality killers have multiple contrasting characteristics & don't fit into one 'type'
  • Holmes 1989 suggests 4 types of serial killer

  Show organised-disorganised typ continuum, not set categories.

  Conflicting typ versions; hard to predict characteristics & may lead to inaccurate profile: low predictive validity
• Not applicable to all types of crime - A03 TDA

  It best suited to crime scenes that reveal key details about suspect like rape, arson, cult killings as well as sadistic torture, dissection of the body & acting out fantasies

  • More common offences (burglary & destruction of property) (or even murder/assault during course of committing these) do not lend themselves to profiling coz the resulting crime scene reveals very little about the offerneder.

  This means that as at best, its a limited approach to identifying a criminal. - ONLY APPLIES TO PARTICULAR CRIMES

  • HOWEVER: MEKETA (2017)
• HOWEVER: can be adapted to other types of crime - A03 TDA

  Meketa (2017) reports that the top down profiling approach has recently been applied to burglary leading to a 85% rise in resolved/solved burglary cases in the USA.

  • The detection methods adds 2 new categories - interpersonal (offender know their victim, steals something of significance) and opportunistic (inexperience young offender)

  This suggests that top-down profiling has wider application than was originally assumed.
• Research in support for an organised category - A03 TDA

  • Canter et al (2004) looked at 100 US serial killings.
  • Smallest space analysis was used to assess the cooccurrence of 29 aspects of the serial killings.
  • This analysis revealed a subset of behaviours of many serial killings which match the FBI's typology for organised offenders.
  • This suggests that a key component of the FBI typology approach has some validity