The Typology Approach (AQA A Level Psychology): Revision Note

The American (FBI) approach

• The typology approach is also known as the American approach to offender profiling, as it was developed, primarily, by Robert Ressler from the FBI’s Behavioural Sciences Unit in the 1970s

• The typology approach is used when pre-determined theories or ideas are applied to data – in the case of offender profiling, the data comes in the form of the crime scene

• The typology approach is deductive, as it applies existing theories and concepts to the information at the crime scene and bases conclusions on them, testing a pre-existing template against the evidence

• The approach was based on in-depth interviews with 36 sexually motivated murderers in the United States, 25 of whom were serial killers, including Ted Bundy and Charles Manson

• The interviews covered details such as:

  • was each murder planned and if so, how?

  • how was each murder carried out?

  • what went through the mind of the killer when they were committing the murder?

  • whether each murderer had regular fantasies about killing?

  • what each murderer did in between killings?

• The data obtained from these interviews, combined with crime scene data, helped Ressler and his colleagues to identify two typologies of murderers: organised and disorganised

• Offender profilers using this method match what is known about the crime and the offender to a pre-existing template, classifying murderers or rapists into one of two categories, with this classification then informing the subsequent police investigation

Organised & disorganised types of offender

• Offender typologies are based on the idea that each type of offender will use a distinct modus operandi (MO), which distinguishes them and the characteristics of their crimes

  • An MO is a signature 'way of working' which correlates with a particular set of social and psychological characteristics that relate to the individual offender

• An example of an MO is that some offenders may bring items to the crime scene or take items with them (e.g., ‘souvenirs’ of the crime), and this can tell investigators about the personality and behaviours of the offender 

• Based on the above typologies Ressler and his colleagues concluded that organised offenders:

  • are likely to have a high IQ and be in a professional or skilled occupation

  • are socially competent and have several friends and colleagues

  • are likely to be in a relationship

  • maintain a high degree of control during the crime and operate with almost detached surgical precision, leaving little evidence or clues behind at the scene

  • tend to be of above-average intelligence, are sexually competent, and are likely to be married and have children

• Based on the above typologies Ressler and his colleagues concluded that disorganised offenders are:

  • likely to have a low IQ and be in an unskilled or semi-skilled occupation (or unemployed)

  • socially incompetent with few friends and colleagues

  • likely to live alone or have a problematic relationship history

  • likely to have acted spontaneously, in a spur of the moment attack reflecting the impulsive nature of the offence

  • likely to have a history of sexual dysfunction and failed relationships

  • more likely to live near the crime scene

Summary of organised vs disorganised offenders

Research which investigates the typology approach to offender profiling

• Snook et al. (2007) conducted a meta-analysis of profiling research and concluded that most profiling was based on little more than common-sense justifications and that profilers were not significantly better at predicting offence behaviours than non-profilers, but were slightly better at identifying overall offender characteristics 

• Canter et al. (2004) – 100 American serial murders were analysed: the results showed that the label organised/disorganised could not easily be applied to the crimes and that there may be a subset of organised characteristics that typify serial murder, whereas disorganised murder rarely fits into a distinct typology

Evaluation of the typology approach to offender profiling

Strengths

• The typology approach is best suited to crime scenes that reveal important details about the suspect, such as rape, arson and cult killings, as well as crimes involving macabre practices such as sadistic torture, dissection of the body and acting out fantasies

  • This is a limitation as much as a strength, since common offences such as burglary and criminal damage do not lend themselves to profiling, because the resulting crime scene reveals very little about the offender

• Canter et al. (2004) analysed 100 murders in the USA using smallest space analysis, examining each case with reference to 39 characteristics thought to be typical of organised and disorganised offenders

  • The findings did indeed suggest evidence of a distinct organised type, but this was not the case for disorganised offenders, which undermines the classification system as a whole

Limitations

• The original sample was 36 killers, only 25 of whom were serial killers, and critics have pointed out that this is too small and unrepresentative a sample on which to base a typology system that may have a significant influence on the nature of a police investigation

  • Canter has also argued that it is not sensible to rely on self-report data from convicted killers when constructing a classification system

• The typology approach assumes offenders behave consistently across situations, e.g., Alison et al. (2002) argue this is naive and based on outdated models of personality that see behaviour as driven by stable traits rather than changing external factors

  • This means the approach is likely to have poor validity when identifying suspects or predicting an offender's next move

Issues & Debates

• The typology approach was developed using American offenders, largely white, male, sexually motivated serial killers

  • This means the approach may be culturally biased and less valid when applied to different populations or non-sexual crimes

• The typology approach is deterministic, as it assumes that personality traits determine an offender's behaviour and crime scene organisation

  • This ignores the role of free will, spontaneity, or situational influences in criminal behaviour