The top-down approach

• Offender profiling is a method used by the police to help identify and catch criminals by predicting characteristics of the offender based on crime scene evidence and the characteristics of the offence.
• The top-down approach was developed by the FBI in the 1970s based on interviews with 36 sexually-motivated serial killers, including Ted Bundy and Charles Manson. It is primarily used for violent crimes, such as murder and rape. This method is typically used in America.
• The top-down approach is also known as the typology approach. Profilers start with a pre-established typology and work down in order to assign offenders to one of two categories (organised or disorganised) based on witness accounts and evidence from the crime scene.
• The top-down approach has 4 stages:

  • Data assimilation
  • Crime scene classification
  • Crime reconstruction
  • Profile generation
• The first stage of the top-down approach is data assimilation. This is when the profiler collects and reviews all available information about the crime, including crime scene photos, reports, and witness statements.
• The second stage of the top-down approach is crime scene classification. This is when the profiler determines whether the offender is an organised or disorganised criminal.
• The third stage of the top-down approach is crime reconstruction. This is when the profiler hypothesises what happened during the crime, including the offender’s behaviour and victim interaction.
• The fourth stage of the top-down approach is profile generation. This is when the profiler develops a profile of the offender, including demographics (age, job, background), personality traits, and possible behaviours.
• An organised offender is an offender who shows evidence of planning, targets the victim and tends to be socially and sexually competent with higher than average intelligence.
• Characteristics of Organised Offenders:

  • Plan their crimes in advance
  • Target specific victims
  • Show high control (e.g., restraining the victim, removing evidence)
  • Are socially and sexually competent
  • Often have an above-average IQ and maintain normal lives
  • Usually married and may have children
• A disorganised offender is an offender who shows little evidence of planning, leaves clues and tends to be socially and sexually incompetent with lower than average intelligence.
• Characteristics of Disorganised Offenders:

  • Act impulsively, with little planning
  • Leave evidence at the crime scene
  • Have little control over the crime
  • Tend to be socially and sexually inadequate
  • Often have lower intelligence and are unemployed
  • Often live alone and relatively close to the crime scene
• A strength of the top-down approach is that research provides some support for the distinction between organised and disorganised offenders. For example, Canter et al. (2004) conducted a content analysis of 100 US serial killer cases and found that the characteristics of organised offenders (e.g., planning, intelligence) were more common than those of disorganised offenders. This suggests that the classification has some validity. However, Canter et al. found no clear evidence for the disorganised type, suggesting the classification system may be too simplistic and lack reliability.
• A key issue with the top-down approach is that it is based on a small and unrepresentative sample. The original FBI classification was developed using 36 serial killers, including high-profile murderers like Ted Bundy and Charles Manson. Such individuals are not typical of all offenders, meaning the approach may not apply to less extreme crimes. Additionally, the method was developed in the USA, so it may not be valid for offenders in other cultures with different motivations and behaviours. This limits the overall generalisability of the approach.
• Another limitation is that the approach assumes all offenders fit into two distinct categories, but real-life cases often show a mix of organised and disorganised characteristics. For example, some criminals plan their crimes carefully but act impulsively during the offence. Godwin (2002) questioned how an offender like this would be classified and argued that the classification may be too simplistic and ignores factors like mental illness, making it difficult to apply in practice. The bottom-up approach, which uses data-driven methods, may be a more scientifically valid alternative.
• A further criticism is that the top-down approach only applies to certain types of crimes, such as rape, murder, and sadistic crimes. It is not useful for more common offences like burglary or financial fraud, as these crimes do not involve crime scene evidence that can be used for profiling. This reduces the practical usefulness of the approach in modern policing. In contrast, the bottom-up approach, which focuses on patterns of behaviour rather than categories of criminals, can be applied to a wider range of crimes.