Essay on Psychological Profiling By Myassignmenthelp.com

Question: Write an essay on Psychological Profiling? Answer: Key concepts of psychological profiling: As per the David Canters Investigative Psychology (DCIP), the main assumptions are highlighted through the subsections as interpersonal coherence, time and place importance, criminal characteristics and criminal career. Going by the DCIP 1st assumption, a normal dealing of the victims by the criminals as with other persons in daily life prevents the identification of criminals through behavioral observation. Clues about personal life and residence of the offender are assumed through the time and place as per 2nd assumption (Canter and Alison, 2012). The 3rd assumption emphasizes on relating the crime and offender to let the difference identified to lead to a classification system. The FBI crime scene analysis identifies the organized, disorganized and mixed types of crime typologies based on differences. David Canter however, rejected it due to the characteristic of overlapping. The 4th assumption of DCIP is the criminal career of the offender based on which, the nature and types of behavioral pattern of the crime is assessed. The Circle theory on the other hand, holds the view of considering crimes to possess a pattern and not being random (Tedeschi, 2013). The Five-Factor model resolves the issue of overlapping by using its five factors of personality traits that helps in description of human personality. The acronym OCEAN (Openness to experience, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness and Neuroticism) can identify the factors (Chiaburu et al. 2011). Identification of criminals through psychological profiling: The theories as DCIP enable the conduction of psychological profiling that are helpful in developing profiles for rapists, murderers and other criminals to apprehend them. As per this theory, the characteristics of the crime are well observed and analyzed to identify the personality, behavior, geographic location and demographic identifications of the criminal. Gardner (2011) asserted that the quality of the data retrieved dictates the process of profiling. The psychological profiling refers to the sketching of the behavioral aspect of the suspected individual. In order to generate a profile, the process initiates with an extensive analysis of the nature of the concerned criminal act and comparing it to the previous similar criminal events. Performing an in-depth analysis of the actual crime scene helps in the identification of the significant facts and details indicating the various aspects of the prospective offender. Analysing the background and activities of the victim enables the identification of possible motives and connections for the crime. Alison and Rainbow (2011) supported it by stating that it assist in analysis of the prospective factors motivating the offender towards the criminal act. The profiling process concludes with the development of the descriptive factors for the offender based on the characteristics identified and compared to former cases. Identification and evaluation of behavioral patterns through profiling research: Based on the Canters Circle Theory of psychological profiling, the two major models describe the spatial behavior of the offender. The Marauder model and the Commuter model are 2 parts of this theory (Canter, 2011). The M-model stating the movement of an offender starting closer to home to the outer range of circle to the crime spot identifies the geographic descriptors to locate the offender, predicting the style of offence committed. The C-model on the other hand, stating that the offenders tend to travel from distant place to closer criminal spots related to their home base to commit the crime, thus identifying a distinct behavioral pattern of the offender. The circle theory uses the offenders previously identified crimes to predict the residential base of the offender. It constructs a circle for the criminals hypothetical range of crime (Van Daele and Vander Beken, 2011). It thus, identifies the relation between the residential base and criminal range of the criminals through the M-model and C-model of spatial behavior. Another theory DCIP, provide description and classification of the prime matters to consider in criminal profiling. It relates the criminals with their activities. With a consideration of the major factors, the theory relates the offender with the evidences found in the crime scene. The behavioral pattern of the criminal is assessed through the close and deep observation of the evidences at the crime scene. The removal of evidence in a planned way, or leaving of clues through evidences denotes the specific patterns of behavior of the offender (Youngs and Canter, 2012). Strengths and weaknesses of 2 psychological theories in terms of appropriateness and effectiveness relating to criminal profiling: David Canters Investigative Psychology theory is highly efficient in identifying the potential offenders based on their psychological profiling. The CAPPS (Computer Aided Passenger Prescreening System) of criminal profiling developed at American Airlines Flight 77 at the Dulles Airport was seen to be able to identify two of the terrorists attacking the pentagon. However, a major weakness of this theory is that due to the broadness of the profiling, several innocent individuals end up with questioning and detention uselessly thus wasting time and energy along with posing an honor risk to those people (Alison and Rainbow, 2011). It raises the ethical issues of detaining an innocent. This theory takes into account the probable consistency of an offender from one criminal act to another. The risk of changes in the criminals behavior over time is a major weakness that renders this theory less effective in the profiling process. Taking the Circle theory of criminal profiling, the home location of an offender is efficiently identified by the examination of the evidences at crime scene. With the occurrence of each crime in a series, the locating efficiency becomes more specific (Ainsworth, 2013). Through mapping of the crime locations, it helps in identifying the base of the offender. Although the theory is efficient in locating the serial criminals as rapists or murderers but it fails to locate the one time criminals efficiently due to lack of previous or future criminal acts. The theory faces restriction while applying in a rural area due to limited residential search in the implied 2 miles radius of its circle. It also suffers from a cloud of non-clearance regarding the labeling of the offenders (Mohler and Short, 2012). References Ainsworth, P. (2013).Offender Profiling Crime Analysis. Willan Alison, L., and Rainbow, L. (Eds.). (2011).Professionalizing offender profiling: Forensic and investigative psychology in practice. Taylor Francis. Canter, D. V. (2011). Resolving the offender profiling equations and the emergence of an investigative psychology.Current Directions in Psychological Science,20(1), 5-10. Canter, D., and Alison, L. (Eds.). (2012).Profiling in policy and practice(Vol. 2). Ashgate Publishing, Ltd Chiaburu, D. S., Oh, I. S., Berry, C. M., Li, N., and Gardner, R. G. (2011). The five-factor model of personality traits and organizational citizenship behaviors: a meta-analysis.Journal of Applied Psychology,96(6), 1140. Gardner, H. (2011).Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. Basic books. Mohler, G. O., and Short, M. B. (2012). Geographic profiling from kinetic models of criminal behavior.SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics,72(1), 163-180. Tedeschi, J. T. (Ed.). (2013).Impression management theory and social psychological research. Academic Press Van Daele, S., and Vander Beken, T. (2011). Outbound offending: The journey to crime and crime sprees.Journal of environmental psychology,31(1), 70-78. Youngs, D., and Canter, D. V. (2012). Narrative roles in criminal action: An integrative framework for differentiating offenders.Legal and Criminological Psychology,17(2), 233-249.