Criminal Profiling Deductive vs Inductive - Essay Example

Criminal Profiling: Deductive vs. InductiveIn the worldwide fight against vicious crime, criminal profiling has become fairly common. This kind of profiling aids the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to capture criminals. Psychological principles are at the very heart of criminal profiling (Turvey, 2011). Analysis of the crime scene is also a handy tool when it comes to criminal profiling. When the detective these two tools, then they can identify the possible characteristics of the purported perpetrator.

Criminal profiling refers to the process whereby specific personality traits are inferred for people responsible for committing criminal acts from either behavioral or physical evidence or in some cases both. Inductive and deductive criminal profiling are different from each other in more ways than one. Deductive criminal profiling is more common because it needs one to have specialized training and education in the field under investigation. This paper will give an in depth analysis of the differences between deductive and inductive criminal profiling.

Profiles work best when the criminal displays psychopathology traits for example postmortem mutilation, pedophilia or sadistic torture. A profile usually offers helpful information regarding issues such as age range, education level and racial identity as well as travel patterns. These demographic variables come in handy when following the trail of the offender and the eventual arrest.Inductive profiling is the case whereby characteristics of offenders who are known are applied to subjects that are unknown.

In this case, detectives believe that the two groups have some common features. It is important to note that it is risky owing to the fact that two people can engage in identical behavior but for different reasons. It is challenging to apply data that is relevant in a group to single entities who are members of the group (Turvey, 2011).. Inductive profiling id used in the classification of rapists as well as serial killers. Inductive profiling uses all the evidence gathered from police reports, crime scenes, psychological evaluations as well as victimology reports.

This is in order to analyze the data empirically and consequently support a theory. On the other hand, deductive profiling is limited to the evidence left at the crime scene. This kind of profiling is very common in the movies. The crime scene is assumed to be the canvas while the criminal deems himself the artist. The crime he commits and especially how he commits it are assumed to reflect his needs, fantasies and internal characteristics (Kocsis, 2007). It is harder to perform than inductive analysis.

It needs in depth understanding of artistry, human behavior as well as criminal thinking and motivation. It usually generates few leads but that is only because it is more accurate. The well known fictional detective Sherlock Holmes was a master of deductive analysis. The biggest hurdle to overcome when using this kind of profiling is that it may be difficult to identify a criminal’s physical characteristics based on behavior (Turvey, 2011). Facts like age, height or color may not come out clearly in their behavior.

The impression that the investigator first gets when he arrives at the crime scene requires one to form theories and opinions. These opinions usually form the basis of the investigation. Therefore if the premises and hypothesis are true and valid, then conclusions will be true. Deductive profiling is commonly used in homicide. For both these profiling methods, none of them is accurate. However, they have been used over the years to reach valid conclusions. However, it is important to note that at times they have failed since they both have imperfections as mentioned.

In a nutshell, both these profiling methods need to be developed in order to be more effective (Kocsis, 2007).ReferencesKocsis, N. R. (2007). Criminal Profiling: International theory, research and practice. Springer. Turvey, B. E. (2011). Criminal profiling: An introduction to behavioral evidence analysis. pp. 52-53). Sitka, AK: Academic Press.