Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

The Criminal Profiling Reality: What is Actually Behind the Smoke and Mirrors?

2013; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 13; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/15228932.2013.765733

1522-9092

Richard N. Kocsis,

Digital and Cyber Forensics

Abstract Despite developments in both the research and investigative use of criminal profiling over the past four decades, empirical evaluation of the accuracy of the technique, and hence its validity, remains limited. This practice update briefly examines the original empirical experiments conducted in the area thus far as well as recent omnibus analyses aimed at assessing accuracy in criminal profiles. Issues that undermine recently promulgated challenges to profiler accuracy are also identified and discussed. Findings evidencing accuracy in criminal profiling from both the original and omnibus studies are also reviewed along with the theoretical implications for differing schools of thought concerning the criminal profiling technique. Keywords: criminal profilingaccuracycriminal investigative analysisinvestigative psychology Notes 1 It should be noted that several different subscales were typically incorporated into the design of these experiments; however, for brevity, discussion is confined to the measure of overall (i.e., total) accuracy. 2 Although CitationKocsis (2003) chronologically precedes CitationKocsis (2004), this circumstance was due to the publication schedules of the differing journals. Accordingly, the research reported in CitationKocsis (2004) did, in fact, occur prior to the study published as CitationKocsis (2003). 3 A detailed examination of the implications from this apparent contradiction is provided in CitationKocsis et al. (2008, pp. 253–255) and CitationKocsis (2010, p.227–228). 4 In this context, readers are recommended to consult, in conjunction with this article, CitationKocsis (2006a), CitationKocsis et al. (2008), and CitationKocsis (2010) for a more detailed explanation. 5 Readers are recommended to refer to CitationKocsis et al. (2008, p. 251–253) for a full examination of this issue concerning the combination of police personnel with profilers. 6 It should be noted that one of the most common methodological criticisms associated with flawed meta-analyses is the inappropriate combination of data into common variables. Readers may refer to CitationIoannidis and Lau (1999) and CitationEsteban, Hernadez, and Kattan (2008) for a more detailed statistical discussion of these principles related to problematic applications of meta-analysis. 7 A total sample size of six police participants features in the experiment by CitationPinizzotto and Finkel (1990). All other police participant data originates from the various studies conducted by Kocsis and colleagues. 8 In this context, the sampled police personnel in the various studies by Kocsis and colleagues originated from quite diverse skill levels and were sampled to explore differing facets both quantitative and qualitative that may be associated with levels of experience in police investigations. For this reason, the sampled police personnel were, themselves, quite diverse, ranging from minimal levels of experience and training observed in police recruits, intermediary levels of experience such as with trainee detectives through to senior detectives with many years of vocational specialization in investigating crimes (e.g., CitationKocsis et al., 2002). 9 Readers are recommend to refer to CitationKocsis et al. (2008, Table 1, pg. 256) for a full description of these findings. 10 Citation details can be found in the reference list with some of the key findings also summarised in CitationKocsis (2006a, pp. 27–64) as, in the author's view, the optimal development of profiling into the future will come from further replication and development of studies of this ilk. 11 It should be noted that only total accuracy values are canvassed in the present article and that relevant findings are also found in the subscales that are not reported in this manuscript. 12 Readers are recommended to consult CitationKocsis et al. (2008) and in particular CitationKocsis (2010, pp. 228–231) for a detailed explanation of these issues. Briefly, the primary purpose of the analysis presented in CitationKocsis et al. (2008) was to duplicate the analyses presented in CitationSnook et al. (2007) for the purpose of highlighting the methodological flaws inherent in these authors’ assertions concerning profiler accuracy. In this regard, the CitationKocsis et al. (2008) analysis was not intended as an optimal evaluation of profiling accuracy, as the second analyses (where profiler and police values are not combined) was still likely to suffer some methodological limitation. For example, as explained in CitationKocsis (2010), there are arguably significant differences between the levels of qualifications and expertise in the sampled individuals collectively labeled as profilers between the studies by CitationPinizzotto and Finkel (1990) and those by Kocsis and colleagues. 13 In the author's opinion, a conventional position to adopt if the original experiments were considered unsound would be to not analyze the same material perceived as flawed.