Bottom up approach

• One strength is that evidence supports investigative psychology. Canter and Heritage conducted an analysis of 66 sexual assult cases using smallest space analysis. Several behaviours were identified in most cases. Each individual displayed a pattern of such behaviours, helps establish whether 2 or more offences were committed by the same person. This supports one of the basic principles of investigative psychology that people are consistent in their behaviour
• A counterpoint to the supporting research is that the database is made up of only solved crimes which are likely to be those that were straightforward to link together - a circular argument. This suggests that investigative psychology may tell us little about crimes that have few links between them and therefore remain unsolved
• Another strength is the support for geographical profiling. Lundrigan and Carter collated information from 120 murder cases in the US smallest space analysis revealed spatial consistency - centre of gravity. Offenders leave home base in different directions when dumping a body but created a circular effect especially in the case of murderers. This supports the view that geographical information can be used to identify an offender
• One limitation is that geographical profiling may not be sufficient on its own. Recording of crime is not always accurate, can vary between police forces and an estimated 75% of crimes are not even reported to the police (dark figure of crime). Even if crime data is correct, other factors matter e.g: time of offence, age and experience. This suggests that geographical information alone may not always lead to the successful capture of the offender