Forensic Midterm 2 PDF

 Criminal Profiling What is criminal profiling Types of CP A technique for identifying the major personality and behavioral characteristics of an individual...

 Criminal Profiling What is criminal profiling Types of CP A technique for identifying the major personality and behavioral characteristics of an individual based upon an analysis of the crimes he or she has committed Inductive profiling By john Douglas Profiling an offender from what is known about other offenders Can contain statistical factors Other names US : profiling Deductive profiling UK : Behavioral investigative advice Profiling an offender from evidence Canada : Criminal investigative analysis relating to the crime of that offender Problem : Logic isn't always correct When is criminal profiling being used Victim and suspect unknown to each other Inductive profiling No clear motive Serial crimes : Homicide, Rape, Arson 80% of serial killers who attack people in parking Extreme psychopathology lots are white males How much is CP used >100 profilers Deductive profiling FBI : 1000 profiles/year in USA UK : 242 profiles 1981-1995 Body of a female victim is found in a locked warehouse on a busy waterfront Leads to Other uses of CP Offender can easily access warehouse and feels Suspect prioritization comfortable In the area New lines of enquiry Setting traps to flush out offenders Determine dangerousness Advice on interrogation methods/Cross- Profile construction examination WHAT+WHY=WHO What : Material that the investigators collect/ Photos of what happened/ Description from witnesses Brief history of CP Why : Motivation. What motivated Late 1800s: Jack the Ripper investigation them to do the crime in the first place 1950s : Ny Mad Bomber investigation Who: 1970s : CP program developed at the FBI Too vague 1990s : Profiling research in the UK (Investigative psychology) Profiling is an art, not a science Today : Similar programs developed But there are some statistical profilers internationally (e.g., RCMP's Behavioural science section)  How CP is constructed Organized Disorganized Constructed through interviews with serial offenders Problem : most offenders are mixed! (Canter et al., 2004) Profile Construction: Investigative psychology Based on action characteristics equation Crime scene actions can be used to make inference about the offender characteristics that can aid an investigation Crime scene actions. - Inference processes. - Offender characteristics Uses statistics to identify clusters, or categories, of behaviors and characteristics Statistical analysis to find relationships between behavior and characteristic clusters Goodwill et al. (2016) Cluster analysis ID'd how sex offenders searched, selected, approached and assaulted victims, background characteristics Search strategy - Hunters (close to home area) / Poachers (travel for victims) / Trollers (encountered during regular routine) / Trappers (Put themselves in situations to give them access to victims) Victim selection - Telio (Adult women) / Pedo,Hebe (Children) / Non-specific (doesn’t matter) Approach behavior - Cons and trickers (use a rues to approach the victim) / Home intruder (break into home) / Non violence persuasion ( using persuasion to become more likeable to the victim) Assault behavior - Violence (Physical force) / Attempt (Little amounts of force but verbal threats) / Persuasion and sexual (persuasive tactics) Background characteristic - Social competent / Antisocial Generalist / Sexually Deviant Geographic profiling Major criticisms of CP Determine probable area of offender residence Profiles offer comfort to officers but are often vague, ambiguous, Used with serial and non-travelling offenders unjustified, or unverifiable Basic assumptions Profiling lacks theoretical support Based on interviews with psychopaths Crimes all belong to one offender (linkage Classic trait model debunked analysis) Expert profilers can barely out-predict university students!!! Offenders live close to their crimes Goal Why is CP used? Prioritize investigation Rise in computerized systems Practical Cover all bases Complex algorithms Victim, Public, etc Reasoning Generally effective, but expensive There is nothing to lose Ignore potential to harm Is this technology needed Belief Actually believe profilers can help with uncertain investigation  Detecting Deception A group of people lie more then others. This group is students. Polygraph method Physiological measures (dry rice powder method) Uses of polygraphs Were required to eat the rice and when they spit it out if it is dry they are lying Polygraph based on belief that deception leads to physiological change (William Helps criminal investigation Marston) (suspect) NOT A LIE DETECTOR People can be anxious or embarrassed Verify a crime has occurred when undergoing a interrogation and this can cause issues with the results of a (Victim) polygraph test and therefore does not make it reliable Insurance companies (Verify claim) Monitoring sexual offenders on Measures probation (United states) Respiration Pre-employment screening Measures a persons breathing. Some people are different types of breathers so this (police, CSIS, etc.) will be able to reach all breathers by all they places they will put monitors on your body Heart rate Change in the heart rate and blood pressure Sweating How much a person sweats Types of polygraph tests Three main types of polygraph tests: Relevant / Irrelevant test Ask questions either : Relevant to the crime (Did you steal the money) Irrelevant to the crime (Is today Friday) Larger physiological responses to relevant questions indicates deception (assumed) Only used for employee screening, no longer used by law enforcement Still ran into the issue of people having anxiety when being asked revelant questions Comparison question test (CGT) (Includes three types of questions) Irrelevant Relevant Comparison The CQT begins with a pre-test interview and has two stages 1 Examiner stresses polygraph is accurate (Deck of cards- show individual a bunch of cards make them pick one and then they will be asked questions) 2 Comparison questions are developed Each comparison/Relevant pair is scored - If comparison > Relevant : +1 +2 +3 - If Relevant > Comparison : -1 -2 -3 Basis is that higher reactions to comparison questions means your innocent, higher reactions to relevant questions indicates guilt Results - 5+ or larger indicates truth - -5 or less indicates guilt If a suspect is believed deceptive they are pressured to confess 1 Innocent people may fail A React more strongly to direct questions B Interrogated if believed to be guilty 1 Guilty suspects may pass A React more strongly to novel questions B Pass polygraph, set free Concealed information test (CIT) Does not assess deception Knowledge about details of the crime Built of 10 multiple choice questions One correct option Four Foils Not assessing deception it is assessing knowledge this is important to know!! Example (Did you steal a…) A Wallet B Purse C Wedding ring D Necklace E Watch Assumes that only someone with knowledge of crime will recognize the correct answer Suspect may forget details of the crime Suspect who consistently respond to critical items are assumed to have knowledge of the crime However, others may have knowledge (media) Not used often in Canada or United States Used in Israel and Japan You do not have to take polygraphs no matter what  Accurate Technology Types of polygraph studies Laboratory studies Volunteers simulate criminal behaviour Commit / Don't commit mock crime Advantages Ground truth is known High level of control Disadvantages Limited application to real-life situations Field studies Real-life situations and actual suspects Compare original vs. blind examiners Compare how many failed polygraphs end up with a guilty confessions Advantage Realism Disadvantage Ground truth is not known Judicial outcomes & confessions used to establish ground truth Doesn't include "polygraph beaters" Accuracy of the CQT Majority of guilty suspects correctly identified (84%-92%) Innocent suspects falsely identified as guilty (9%-24%) Accuracy of original examiners higher than blind scores Accuracy of the CIT Very accurate at identifying innocent participants (up to 95%) Less accurate at identifying guilty participants (76%-85%) CIT May falsely classify guilty suspects as innocent Take if you are innocent CQT May falsely classify innocent suspects as guilty  Detection Deception … Can you beat the Polygraph Admissibility if polygraphs Countermeasures are effective for CQT Originally did not pass "general acceptance test" in the US (Frye v. United Physical (Squeezing your fingers, toes) states 1923) Medical (Mental mathematics, counting back) Currently allowed in some states if agreed by both prosecution and defence The CIT not affected by anti-anxiety drugs Polygraph examiner able to tell if respondent Not admissible into evidence in Canadian Courts (R. V. Beland, 1987) on drugs Psychopaths are not able to beat the polygraph in lab studies Polygraph : Take home messages Not a lie detector on measure physiological responses Dependant on questioning techniques and interviewee's beliefs Can be beaten relatively easy Conclusions of Scientific Experts Research raises concerns Should be used with caution 1 Theoretical rationale weak 2 Existing validation studies have serious limitations 3 No satisfactory field studies 4 Practitioners claim inappropriately high levels of accuracy Can professionals detect deception? Average accuracy = 56% Police, Judges, Psychologists Students: 54% accuracy Other physiological measures Reason for low accuracy 1 Rely on wrong cues (e.g,. Gaze aversion) 2 Truth-Bias (i.e,. Tendency to judge messages as truthful) Thermal imaging Detects facial warming due to blood flow Can improve with training Quite accurate When we get nervous the flow of blood will increase around our eyes so this tool will be Serious implications (e.g., interrogation) able to detect when a person reacts nervously to a question Do FBI agents listen to research most of the time no Brain-Based measures: Event-related brain potential (ERP) P300 used to detect guilty knowledge Lying online Online dating websites Functional magnetic resonance Provided inaccurate information: Height(Men overestimate imaging (fMRI) their height) / Weight (Women underestimate their weight) / People Different brain areas activated during say they are younger then they are lying vs. truth telling Verbal and non-verbal indicators Verbal cues: Indicators revealed by the voice Non-Verbal cues: Indicators revealed by body Assumption: People unaware People can't control Theories behind verbal/non- verbal indicators 1 Emotional/Arousal (Guilt, Fear, Excitement) 2 Content Complexity (Probably more cognitively taxing to tell a lie them tell a truth) (More effort in lying then telling the truth) (Speech errors/ Speaking slower/ Long pauses) 3 Attempted Behavioural Control (Liers may attempt to control behavioural cues because they do not want to present as dishonest) (Attempting to control there cues that may be associated with lying) (Mostly used by people who have an education on what behaviours show dishonesty) (May forget to blink/ Solid statue) Non-Verbal Behaviours indicators of deception Common beliefs Gaze aversion Fidgeting BOTH NOT related to deception Liars do show LESS: Nodding Foot and leg movements Hand movements Verbal indicators of deception Higher pitch voice (Best cue) Speech fillers Ah / Ummmm Slower rate of speech Verbal indicators of deception Verbal cues that are indicati1ve of deception: Little detail Less compelling account No spontaneous correcting Don't admit lack of memory Cues present when motivated to lie Disorder of Deception 1 Factitious disorders Munchausen syndrome Munchausen syndrome by proxy 1 Malingering 2 Defensiveness 1. Factitious disorders Intentionally produced symptoms Internal motivation to assume the sick role Absence of external incentives Patients lack insight into underlying psychological motivation Munchausen syndrome Intentionally produces physical complaint Seeks treatment Harm self to continue symptoms Chronic and hard to treat Munchausen syndrome by proxy Report/Create symptoms in children Generally the mother Most victims young Age 4 or younger usually Sometimes suffer long-term injuries 6-9% of children died 2.Malingering Symptoms are under voluntary control External motivations for symptoms Avoid criminal punishment Workers comp. Homeless people to get a place to stay Prevalent in forensic settings 3.Defensiveness Conscious denial or minimalization of symptoms Present themselves in favourable light Sexual offenders Rosehan (1973) Being Sane in insane places Pseudio-patients are admitted to a mental hospital Presented symptoms of hearing voices Once admitted, pseudio-patients claimed not hearing anymore voices, acted Normal Staff failed to identify them as malingering Power of the label!  Expert Testimony Factors affecting encoding Attention Unexpectedness Stages of memory Witness involvement Perception / Attention Stress level of witness Encoding State of the witness Short-term memory (Limited cognitive space)(You will loose is) Long-term memory Retrieval Change blindness We miss large changes to our visual view 75% of people don’t notice big changes Some facts about memory Changes in memory occur without of distortions Memory is Niable (Can be reshaped) Memories change because, overtime, they are constructed and Attentional saturation reconstructed Encoding everything we see can be overwhelming and Repeated processing od memory causes it to change maladaptive Can recognize familiarity, but don’t focus on all details Factors affecting retrieval Inferences (People guess) Stereotypes (people fill in gaps) Partisanship (biases influence memory) Scripts / Schemas (typical vs actual info) Emotional factors (anxiety blocks retrieval) Context effects (cues trigger memories) Types of memory Recall memory Responsible for reporting details of a previously witnessed event or person On your own valition Short term memory Recognition memory Responsible for determining whether a previously seen item/person is the same as what is currently being viewed. Eyewitness research (How do we study eyewitness issues? Archival data (Police reports, court transcripts) Naturalistic observations (Observe witnesses in a natural environment) Laboratory simulations (Most common) INDEPENDENT VARIABLES Estimator Variables Variables that are present at the time of the crime and cannot be changed E.g,. Age of witness Can only be estimated after the crime System Variables Variables that can be manipulated to increase or decrease eyewitness accuracy E.g,. Type of lineup used DEPENDANT VARIABLE Recognition of perpetrator What do you remember in your mind Recognition Recall of perpetrator What was there physical look Did they have tattoos Recall of event/crime What happened according to you Last to are open ended questions Two ways of gathering information from witnesses Open ended recall / free narrative Recount without being prompted Tell, explain, or describe questions Higher quality Gather more detail Direct question recall Asked specific questions What was the colour of the perpetrator's jacket? Measuring recall of information Amount of information reported Type of information reported (peripheral(Time of day) (stuff that’s related but can be put aside) vs. Central (car/people involved) (stuff that is important to the case at hand)) Accuracy of information (Proportion of correct information, omission errors, commission errors) Measuring recognition of information Accuracy (In a lineup if a witness has correctly identified) (How often people make the errors) Type of errors Police questioning Goal Collect complete & accurate information Fisher et al. (1987( found that police officers Interrupted witnesses often Asked short, specific question Asked off-topic question Asked leading questions Leading questions Misinformation effect Loftus & Palmer (1974) Showed group of people a video of a car accident Smashed vs Hit Smashed reported higher speeds All they did was say either smash or hit in the sentence they used Affects future recall Did you see any broken glass? Smashed : 32% said yes Hit : 14% said yes There was not broken glass in the video Did you see the broken headlight? / Did you see a broken headlight? Wording of questions matters! The experiment we did in class shows the opposite results Hit was faster guesses Hit was a higher percentage of yes broken glass Implications False information or information provided after an event can influence memory Subtle phrasing differences may bias witnesses' responses Explaining the misinformation effect Misinformation acceptance hypothesis : People are guessing the answer to please the person asking the question Source misattribution hypothesis : Both memories in their mind and what has been adopted from leading questions or hearing talk about the case but the person is unable to identify which memory is in reality their remembrance and what they have adopted Memory impairment hypothesis : Your original memory no longer exists and you have fully adopted what you have adopted from leading questions or what you have heard from other sources. Improving police interviewing Forensic psychologists can provide training to police Officer to help improve interviewing Aiding eyewitness memory Hypnosis Can increase amounts of details But these details are not necessarily accurate Hypnotized person is more suggestible, and is equally as confident in accurate and inaccurate details Not permitted in Canadian Courts!!! Cognitive interview (CI) Based on principles of memory storage & retrieval Used on witnesses (Not recommended for suspects) Memory retrieval techniques 1 Mental reinstatement of context 2 "report everything" 3 Recall event in different order 4 Change perspectives Compared to standard interviews & hypnosis, The CI : Increased amount of accurate information 30% increase overall Enhanced cognitive interview Included principles of social dynamics + the memory retrieval principles used in the CI Additional components Rapport building Supportive interviewer behaviour Transfer of control Focused retrieval Witness compatible questioning CI Training in Canada Tier 1 : Basic interviewing skills Tier 2 : Introduction to PEACE Tier 3 : Specialist interviewers Child interviewing : NICHD protocol Significant Witness Advanced suspect Tier 4 : Evaluators - QA Tier 5 : Strategic Advisor Recall of perpetrator Description often lack detail & accuracy Gender & height are most commonly reported Most accurate reported info : Gender, Hair colour, & hair style Least accurate reported info : weight, eye colour, & footwear Recognition of memory 1 Live lineups of Photo Arrays 2 Video Surveillance Records 3 Voice identification Lineup Identification Suspect : A person the police suspect committed the crime (may be innocent may be guilty) Perpetrator : The guilty person Lineups helps determine if the suspect is the perpetrator Lineups contain the suspect + foils (innocent individuals) Police select foils that look like the suspect Fair lineup vs. lineup of clones Identification decisions Target-Present lineups 1 Correct identification 2 Foil identification 3 False rejection Target-Absent lineups 1 Correct rejection 2 Foil identification 3 False identification Foil identification & false identification is a false positive Live vs. photo lineup Canadian police generally use photo array because they are Easier to construct Portable Suspect doesn't have the right to counsel Photo are static (i.e,. No variation in suspect behaviour) Less stressful for witness Lineup procedures Simultaneous lineup Presents all members at the same time Relies on relative judgement Sequential lineup Presents members one at a time Relies on absolute judgement Simultaneous vs. sequential lineup Similar correct identification rates More correct rejections for sequential lineups But not all research supports this finding Other lineup procedures Show-ups Suspect shown to witness and asked whether the person is the perpetrator. Can be biased Walk-by Occurs in a naturalistic environment. Witness is taken to a public location where the suspect is likely to be , and is asked whether or not they see the perpetrator.