click below
click below
Normal Size Small Size show me how
psychology paper 3:
psychology: forensic science: top down approach + offender profiling:
Question | Answer |
---|---|
1. what is the top down approach? | investigative method relying on previous experience of crimes |
2. what is an offender profile? | behavioural and analytical tool accurately predicting type of person who committed the crime |
3. who made the top down approach? | Hazelwood and Douglas |
4. when was the top down approach made? | 1980 |
5. who uses the top down approach? | FBI |
6. what is offender profiling? | process of predicting the characteristics of an offender based on information available |
7. how was the top down approach created? | completing an in depth interview of 36 convicted murders (serial killers and police officers) |
8. where was the top down approach made? | US |
9. characteristics of an organised crime? | planned, self control at crime scene, leaves few cues, targeted stranger, attempts to control victim |
10. characteristics of a disorganised crime? | little planning, little attempt hide evidence, minimum constraint, random disorganised behaviour |
11. characteristics of an organised offender? | above average IQ, socially and sexually competent, married, experiencing anger/depression, follows media coverage of crime, skilled occupation |
12. characteristics of an disorganised offender? | lives alone, sexually and socially inadequate, unemployed, physically or sexually abused in childhood, frightened / confused at time of crime |
13. who made the construction of the FBI profile? | Douglas |
14. when was the construction of the FBI profile made? | 2006 |
15. how many main parts of the construction of the FBI profile are there? | 4 |
16. what is data assimilation? | reviews evidence |
17. what is crime scene classification? | organised vs disorganised |
18. what is crime scene reconstruction? | hypothesis of sequence of events |
19. what is profile generation? | hypothesis of likely offender |
20. application to particular crimes? | cannot be applied to common offences such as burglary so it has limited use |
21. problems with methodology and how it was created? | based on flawed data of interviews of 36 serial killers ,who were manipulative and unreliable, to create the typology theory so social desirability could factor reduce internal validity |
22. based on outdated models of personality? | typology classification is based on the assumption that offenders have patterns in their behaviour and remain constant but Ailson et al (2002) argued behaviour is driven by external factors and is always changing affecting temporal validity |
23. how does it create false dichotomy (consistent pattern)? | only 2 categories (organised and disorganised) where Canter et al (2004) analysed murders 100 US serial killers finding no clear distinction in types of offenders but rather subsets, therefore should be improved Godwin (2002) hard to establish |
24. successful application? | Tina Meketa (2017) found recent adaptation of the approach have been successful in solving cases of burglary in the US |
25. supporting characteristics to the top down approach? | Canter et al (2004) conducted a study using statistical technique to identify correlations among 29 variables with serial killings showing distinct sets of common characteristics consistent with 'organised type' FBI typology |
26. adaptation of the approach? | added 2 categories interpersonal and opportunistic, therefore having wider application that originally assumed |