Psychological profiling

SIGNIFICANCE: Media portrayals have fostered a growing public fascination with the budding field of psychological profiling. Although there is debate over whether this field is more of an art than a science, it has proven particularly useful in investigations of suspects who commit serial crimes. Research confirms that at this stage in the development of psychological profiling, it should be regarded as a valuable tool for investigators, rather than a crime-solving strategy.

Variously known as criminal personality profiling, criminal profiling, crime scene analysis, and investigative analysis, psychological profiling is the technique of studying details of crimes in order to learn about the probable characteristics of the perpetrators. By examining all features of a crime, including time and location, victim characteristics, methods used, and other pertinent information, psychological profilers attempt to infer characteristics about the perpetrators. The profilers draw on their inferences to build models of possible perpetrators that include their likely psychological makeup, mental health, social adjustment, age, sex, race, height, and physical appearance. The profiles are provided to law enforcement to assist in identifying potential suspects or to aid in interrogations of already identified suspects.

History of Psychological Profiling

What may have been the first employment of psychological profiling was used in the investigation of one of the most notorious murder sprees in history—London’s Whitechapel murders of the late nineteenth century whose unidentified perpetrator was dubbed Jack the Ripper. However, psychological profiling did not begin to achieve acceptance in law enforcement until after the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) established its Psychological Profiling Program within is Behavioral Science Unit in 1978.

The FBI program began with the classification of information gathered through intensive interviews of thirty-six convicted sexual murderers. In 1985, psychologist David Canter of the University of Surrey in England was asked to assist in the investigation of a criminal known as the Railway Rapist. The profile that Canter produced proved useful in apprehending the rapist-murderer and helped launch Canter on a search for psychological principles that would be useful in generating other profiles. Much of his research drew on what he could learn about interactions between perpetrators and their victims. Canter later established a graduate program in “investigative psychology” at the University of Liverpool. Canter’s work was followed by that of private investigator Richard N. Kocsis and his colleagues in Australia, who have conducted studies on the accuracy of psychological profiling and the skills necessary to employ the method successfully.

The Process of Psychological Profiling

Although there is no single protocol, the process of developing profiles usually follows several steps. The first stage, profiling inputs, involves collecting and documenting all information that might help in solving the crimes. This information usually includes crime scene photos, police reports, results from an autopsy, and all information about victims, including age and sex.

In the second stage, known as the decision process models, collected information is organized so that preliminary analyses of the crimes are possible. In this stage, the nature of the crimes is considered, possible offender motives are inferred, and the amounts of time necessary to commit the crimes are considered.

In the third stage, crime assessment, profilers attempt to reconstruct the crimes in detail. They produce play-by-play reconstructions of the crime scene and of interactions between offenders and their victims, while considering such matters as the amount of planning needed, the extent of gratuitous aggression, types of wounds, positioning of bodies, and lengths of time for crime scene staging.

Canter’s research suggests that the “criminals’ shadows” should be interpreted. He uses “shadow” to mean the story, or inner narrative, of the offender that is reflected in the degree of care the offender has taken to avoid capture, the degree of expertise needed to complete the crime, personal habits, and various peculiarities of an individual crime.

In the fourth stage, the criminal profile, actual psychological profiles are completed. Complete profiles may be so detailed as to include exact age, race, sex, body type, style of clothing, occupational history, capacity for emotional intimacy, and living arrangements. Profiles might also include relationships between the offenders and their victims; the offenders’ behavior before, during, and after the crimes; and their personality makeup. The final stages, investigation and apprehension, ideally consist of successful identifications, location, and arrests of suspects who match the profiles.

Psychological profiling is based on several assumptions, including the belief that criminals’ crime scenes reflect their personalities. Moreover, because personality traits tend to be stable and enduring, crime scenes should reveal similar consistency. This assumption is believed to be particularly true of serial offenders, such as murderers, rapists, and arsonists, whose behaviors typically reveal continuity and consistency. For example, many serial murderers leave identifiable marks, or “signatures,” at their crime scenes. Some offenders collect items or “trophies.” Body positioning and crime manipulations (“staging”) are usually distinctive and consistent. Another assumption of psychological profiling is that while the methods, or modus operandi (MO), of serial criminals may change somewhat over time and in different situation, other behavior patterns, such as their signatures, generally do not.

Validity of Psychological Profiling

Part of the controversy over psychological profiling stems from misunderstandings of its purpose. The FBI’s own Behavioral Science Unit cautioned that although profiles occasionally lead directly to identifications of suspects, such successes are the exception rather than the rule. The chief value of psychological profiles is the direction they give to investigations to help them focus on the most likely characteristics of suspects. A study of nearly two hundred FBI profiles found that they were deemed useful in 46 percent of the cases, and in 17 percent of cases they led to actual suspects. In a majority of cases, investigators felt that the profiles provided a better focus for the process of investigating a crime.

Critics of profiling have argued that although profiles may create a wealth of information, there is currently no way of knowing what part of that information is critical. Another criticism concerns the validity of the information in the databases used to develop profiles. No central database of information on criminals exists, and the few databases that do exist draw information almost exclusively from convicted felons. Information on perpetrators who evade arrest is therefore not included. Moreover, there is also concern about the accuracy of self-reported serial offenders, the majority of whom have antisocial personalities and are proficient at lying and impression management. Finally, the requisite skills for psychological profiling are debated. Some have argued that investigative experience is essential, but recent research suggests that objectivity and logical reasoning are more important.

Bibliography

Bartol, C. R. Criminal and Behavioral Profiling. Los Angeles: Sage, 2014. Print.

Canter, David. Criminal Shadows: Inner Narratives of Evil. London: AuthorLink Press, 2000. Print.

Cassick, Callie. "Criminal Profiling: The Techniques Used by Police to Catch Dangerous Offenders." Fox News, 28 Mar. 2024, www.foxnews.com/us/true-crime-criminal-profiling. Accessed 9 July 2024.

Douglas, John. The Anatomy of Motive: The FBI’s Legendary Mindhunter Explores the Key to Understanding and Catching Violent Criminals. New York: Pocket Books, 2000. Print.

Douglas, John, and Mark Olshaker. Mindhunter: Inside the FBI’s Elite Serial Crime Unit. New York: Scribner, 1995. Print.

Egger, Steven A. The Need to Kill: Inside the World of the Serial Killer. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 2003. Print.

Holmes, Ronald M., and Stephen T. Holmes, eds. Contemporary Perspectives on Serial Murder. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1998. Print.

Kocsis, Richard N., Andrew F. Hayes, and Harvey J. Irwin. “Investigative Experience and Accuracy in Psychological Profiling of a Violent Crime.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 17.8 (2002): 811–23. Print.

Turvey, Brent T. Criminal Profiling: An Introduction to Behavioral Evidence Analysis. Burlington: 2015. Print.

Ressler, Robert K., and Thomas Schachtman. I Have Lived in the Monster: Inside the Minds of the World’s Most Notorious Serial Killers. New York: St. Martin’s, 1998. Print.

Scherer, J. Amber, and John P. Jarvis. "Criminal Investigative Analysis: Practitioner Perspectives." FBI. US Dept. of Justice, 10 June 2014. Web. 20 June 2016.

Turney, Brent E. Criminal Profiling: An Introduction to Behavioral Evidence Analysis. Academic Press, 2022.

White, J. H., and D. Lester, eds. "Criminal Profiling." Encyclopedia of Crime and Punishment. New York: Wiley, 2016. 1–5. Print.