1

The Realities of Criminal Profiling

Kasi West

PSY 3710

UVU Fall 2022

 2

Introduction

Criminal profiling is an educated guess that may help resolve a case or narrow down the

type of suspect that tends to commit certain crimes. There is no simple way that profilers can

predict future behaviors, however, in some cases, they are effective where the unknown offender

displays certain types of psychopathologies (Gladwell, 2007; Holmes & Holmes, 2009) Along

with psychopathology, the crime scene itself can give clues to the typology of criminal. There

are two categories the serial killers can be place in, organized and disorganized. They crime

scene can tell investigators what category the suspect can be placed in by evaluating aspects such

as whether there was a blitz-attack, if the evidence was moved, if the weapon was left on the

scene and many other investigative clues. (Gladwell, 2007)

Criminal Profiling

There are two types of approaches that are used to create a criminal profile, inductive and

deductive profiling. Although they are different in many ways, they are both used together in

order to get a complete profile on an offender. The inductive criminal investigative assessment is

created by viewing similar crimes and comparing them to the similarities of the offenders. Thus,

giving investigators a narrowed search for suspects. This method is quick but not very specific.

With deductive criminal investigative assessments, a thorough analysis of the crime scene,

evidence left behind, and an insight into the victim, give the profiler a more precises picture of

the unknown offender. (Chifflet, 2014; Kocsis & Palermo, 2013; Ribeiro & Soeiro, 2021)

According the journal article, Questioning the validity of criminal profiling: an evidence-

based approach (2014), the author argues a point that criminal profiling and its various

approaches are an invalid practice and should not be used in law enforcement investigations. The

author makes several claims to back their position on criminal profiling by providing examples
 3

of research that demonstrates that profilers are no more accurate in their predictions than non-

profilers. One of the most powerful claims that sceptics of the accuracy of criminal profiling

make, is in regards to the Barnum effect stating, “It is easy for humans to interpret general and

vague statements as if they were specific to their situation. This is an important contributing

factor for why people believe in astrology.” (E., 2020)

Criminal profiling is never one hundred percent accurate, and it does not claim to be.

However, there is still a large support for its use in the law enforcement community. Criminal

profiling is an aid to help law enforcement investigators identify suspects. The goals in profiling

include; providing the criminal justice system with an assessment of the offender, provide a

psychological evaluation of belongings found with the offender, and to provide interview

suggestions and strategies. (Kocsis & Palermo, 2013; Ribeiro & Soeiro, 2014; Holmes &

Holmes, 2009,)

The process of creating a profile includes many aspects to take into consideration to

discern a personality from a crime scene. These factors include evaluating and blending five

personality components; biology, culture, environment, common experiences, and unique

experiences. (Holmes & Holmes, 2009) By using these elements, a profiler can create an image

of the offender to aid in identification, apprehension, and interviewing a suspect. The crime

scene reflects the type of person that would commit such crimes. Violent crime scenes reflect

violent personalities, serial offenders leave evidence that is the same at each crime scene, and the

nature of the crime can tell a story.

The importance of analyzing the crime scene in building a profile is vital. A profiler can

evaluate a crime scene and recognize aspects of the offender that would be the same when not
 4

committing a crime. Disorganized offenders demonstrate a blitz and unplanned attack on the

victim, as with organized offenders will leave a more tidy and deliberate crime scene behind.

Knowing these basic aspects can help investigators conclude whether their offender knows the

victim or not, what psychological state the offender has, and possibly the demographic location

of the perpetrator. (Gladwell, 2007)

There is no empirical evidence to support the accuracy of criminal profiling, yet use of

criminal profiling within law enforcement has shown to be beneficial in some cases. Criminal

profiling can guide law enforcement to searching for a certain type of suspect and narrow down

the vast majority of the population down quickly. However, it should not be used as the primary

tool in locating an offender. There are sometimes too many variables to be accurate in the type of

individual that would commit a certain crime. Holmes and Holmes published an excellent

example of this in the book Profiling Violent Crimes: An Investigative Tool with the case profile

of Mrs. Charlene L. Miller. In this profile, the profiler wrote up a thorough description of an

offender that would have committed a murder and dismemberment of a woman. Although the

profile ended up being accurate in some instances, it was not specific enough to single out the

offender. (Holmes & Holmes, 2009)

Although there is no guarantee that a profile will be key in an investigation, it is not

worth simply brushing it aside in some cases. There have been profiles that have been

remarkably accurate and have been a key tool in locating an offender. These cases seem to carry

certain elements, such as the sophisticated bombing of George Metesky aka The Mad Bomber.

The profiler was able to distinguish very accurately the description of the offender down to what

he would be wearing when law enforcement encountered him. (Gladwell, 2007; Chifflet, 2014)
 5

Research into criminal profiling shows that there is difficulty in measuring the accuracy

and validity of the methods and use to convict a suspect. Some studies show that professional

profilers are much more accurate that non-profilers, and other studies show there is no difference

between the accuracy of the two groups. The validity of criminal profiling is supported by law

enforcement and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The FBI has dedicated an entire

behavior analysis team to improve and develop criminal profiles for major crimes. (Ribeiro &

Soeiro, 2021; Kocsis & Palermo, 2013; Chifflet, 2014; Gladwell, 2007, Holmes & Holmes,

2009)

There is much to be said in the advancement of criminal profiling. The development in

personality psychology and the instruments used in psychological evaluation for recidivism hold

many of the same qualities and insights that would be used in developing a criminal profile. The

primary difference between criminal profiling and the others is that profiling is of an unknown

offender, whereas the evaluations are conducted upon known offenders. In researching

similarities between known offenders, the possibility of designing a process that could target

certain trait-based or crime characteristics may lead to more accurate profiles. (Kocsis&

Palermo, 2013; Ribeiro & Soeiro, 2021)

Personally, the idea of criminal profiling seems quite fascinating when one sees it in

action through films such as CSI or Silence of the Lambs. The reality, however, is that it is truly

unreasonable to conclude that a profile could be one hundred percent accurate. If this were the

case, criminals would be captured and convicted solely on a profile. My personal view is that

criminal profiling can assist law enforcement, it is not a replacement for good investigative

research. Profiling is simply another investigation tool that can be used to identify and interview

offenders, just as other tools are used in crime scene investigations.

 6

In conclusion, the procedures developed by the FBI in an attempt to build criminal

profiles are not scientifically valid. With more research, a design of empirical studies, and

advancement of personality psychology, the possibility of a scientifically valid procedure is

hopeful. With that, an expert witness from the FBI criminal investigative analysis would not

meet the Daubert challenge in court. Although the profile could be useful in narrowing down a

suspect and help determine the reoffending likelihood in a known offender, it is not scientifically

valid and could not be used as a tool to convict a suspect in court. The use of criminal profiling

should be taken into account by the APA’s specialty guidelines for forensic psychologists under

Guideline 2.09: Appropriate Use of Services and Products, Guideline 2.05: Knowledge of the

Scientific Foundation for Opinions and Testimony, and Guideline 9.02: Use of Multiple Sources

of Information. These guidelines all clearly state that the misuse, misleading, and bias opinion of

the psychologist is unethical. The lack of scientific validity should be communicated when

presenting any profile in court. (“Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology.,” 2013)
 7

References

Chifflet, P. (2014). Questioning the validity of criminal profiling: an evidence-based approach.

Australian &Amp; New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 48(2), 238–255.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0004865814530732

E. (2020, August 6). The Criminal Profiling Deception. Debunking Denialism.

https://debunkingdenialism.com/2013/07/23/the-criminal-profiling-deception/

Gladwell, M. (2007, November 5). Dangerous Minds. The New Yorker.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/11/12/dangerous-minds

Holmes, Ronald M., and Holmes, Stephen T., Profiling Violent Crimes: An Investigative Tool.

4th ed. Los Angeles: Sage Publications, Inc., 2009. Print.

Kocsis, R. N., & Palermo, G. B. (2013). Disentangling Criminal Profiling. International Journal

of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 59(3), 313–332.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624x13513429

Ribeiro, R. A. B., & Soeiro, C. B. B. D. M. (2021). Analysing criminal profiling validity:

Underlying problems and future directions. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry,

74, 101670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2020.101670

Specialty guidelines for forensic psychology. (2013). American Psychologist, 68(1), 7–19.

https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029889