Is Criminal Profiling a Real Science?

The subject of criminal profiling has caught the public’s imagination in recent times, with references to it appearing in all forms of media. The most well-known example of criminal profiling in the popular media is in the film Silence of the Lambs, based on the Thomas Harris novel of the same name. Several television shows have also been based around the premise of criminal profiling, such as Criminal Mind. It is interesting to note that all of these popular portrayals of profiling are somewhat inaccurate because they suggest that profiling is a magical skill somewhat similar to a cognitive psychic ability. Those who practice criminal profiling have claimed that it is alternatively a science or an art, depending on who you listen to. Even those who confess that it is more an art than a science (Ressler & Shachtman, 1992) still point to supposedly scientific studies to support their claims that it is in fact worth using. Profiling may not lead to the exact individual but it often helps police narrow the focus of their investigation.

WHAT IS CRIMINAL PROFILING?

Criminal profiling is the process of using available information about a crime and crime scene to compose a psychological portrait of the unknown perpetrator of the crime. The information that the criminal profiler uses is often taken from the scene of the crime, and takes into account factors such as the state of the crime scene, what weapons (if any) were used in the crime, and what was done and said to the victim (Canter,1989). According to Canter, other information used in criminal profiling can include the geographic pattern of the crimes, how the offender got to and from the crime scene, and where the offender lives. According to Holmes and Holmes (1996), psychological profiling has three major goals to provide the criminal justice system with the following information: a social and psychological assessment of the offender(s), a psychological evaluation of relevant possessions found with suspected offenders, and consultation with law enforcement officials on the strategies that should be used when interviewing offenders. Not all profiles involve all of these three aspects, with the role of the profiler usually being dictated largely by the needs of the law enforcement officials for whom they are consulting. Also, not all crimes are suitable for profiling. Holmes and Holmes state that profiling is only appropriate in cases in which the unknown offender shows signs of psychopathology or the crime is particularly violent or ritualistic. Rape and arson are also considered by Holmes and Holmes to be good candidates for profiling. A profile will rarely by itself solve a crime or catch a criminal, but is designed to be an aid to the investigating police (Wilson & Soothill, 1996). The profile will rarely be so accurate as to suggest a certain individual as being responsible for the crime, but should point the police in the right direction and help reduce the possible number of subjects. When the police have no leads, a profile might suggest some potentially helpful area that the police might have overlooked.

IS PROFILING SCIENTIFIC?

One of the biggest obstacles standing in the way of acceptance of criminal profiling is that there is very little authoritative material on it, and almost nothing in the way of scientific studies to support the claims of the profilers. Many of the law enforcement agencies around the world are still quite skeptical of the work of criminal profilers. Holmes and Holmes (1996) observe that an offender profile is usually only called in when the police have exhausted all other leads, sometimes including psychics and astrologers. Techniques such as forensic DNA analysis have become essential to modern criminal investigation, possibly because one can point to the strong scientific basis on which they are founded. Even though the experimental evidence is still not overwhelming, studies such as those conducted by Pinizzotto and Finkel (1990) suggest that profiling might have some validity. They base this claim on a case study of selected high profile crimes, but do not give any references or source for the data. The main problem with this claim is that it is purely unreliable. Organizations such as the FBI are reluctant to release figures on the successes and failures of the profiles that they provide. Although figures such as an 80% success rate have been circulated (Ressler & Shachtman, 1992), there has yet to be any data put forward to substantiate this claim. According to Ressler (1988), the accuracy of each profile is looked at after an offender has been apprehended so that the profilers may learn from their errors. The evaluation is not performed in public, and most people have no knowledge of how accurate profiles actually are. This is becoming increasingly important, as more private individuals are commissioning profiles themselves (or requesting that the investigating police do) for cases in which they have an interest. There is also the question as to how accurate a profile actually has to be to be of help to the investigating authorities. Obviously, an incorrect profile has the potential to mislead the investigation, but this may only be a problem if the police place a greater amount of faith in the profile than they do in their own investigative skills. Pinizzotto for example, found that from 192 requests for profiles, only 17% actually were used to help identify the suspect. More positively, 77% of the respondents reported that the profile had helped them to focus their investigation. Overall, if profiles are consistently found to be incorrect in at least some aspects, police will quickly lose faith in their worth.

Criminal profilers are responsible for developing psychological profiles of offenders based on the crime scene. Some investigations have led to identification of suspects. However, there are times when this may not succeed. The field has solicited a lot of controversy due to the tactics utilized. Offender profiling, in all its various guises, is still very much a discipline that is yet to be proved. Unlike much of psychology or criminology, the accuracy of an offender profile may have profound implications. If a profile of an offender is wrong or even slightly inadequate police may be misled, allowing the offender to escape detection for a little while longer—and innocent people may be dead as a result. This is not to say that profiles should be ignored or that police should not use them, but that profiling should be approached with caution.

References:

Canter, D. (1989, January). Offender profiles. Psychologist, 2, 12-16.

Holmes, R. M.,&Holmes, S. T. (1996). Profiling violent crimes: An investigative tool (2nd ed.).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Pinizzotto, A. J.,&Finkel, N. J. (1990). Criminal personality profiling:Anoutcome and process

study. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 215-233.

Ressler, R. K., & Shachtman, T. (1992). Whoever fights monsters. New York: Pocket Books.

Wilson, P., & Soothill, K. (1996, January). Psychological profiling: Red, green or amber?

Police Journal, 69, 12-20.