There has been little empirical study of the abilities contributing to proficient performance in psychological profiling. The authors sought to address this issue by comparing the accuracy of psychological profiles for a closed murder case generated by groups differing primarily in characteristics posited to underlie the profiling process. In addition to a sample of professional profilers, the study recruited groups of police officers, psychologists, university students, and self-declared psychics. Another group of participants compiled a generic profile of murderers without knowledge of the specific case given to other groups. Despite the small size of the sample of profilers, there were indications that this group had a set of profiling skills superior to the individual skills represented by the other expertise groups. In addition, the performance of psychologists was better in some respects than that of police and psychics, suggesting that an educated insight into human behavior might be relatively pertinent to psychological profiling. On the other hand, it would seem that psychics relied on nothing more than the social stereotype of a murderer in their production of the offender's profile.

Criminal psychological profiling has attained unprecedented recognition despite little empirical evidence to support its validity and the absence of any thorough exposition of the skills involved with the technique. This article reports on the empirically derived conclusions of studies that sought to examine the accuracy and skill of various groups performing a profiling task. The conclusions provide some support for the contention that professional profilers can produce a more accurate prediction of an unknown offender in comparison to other studied groups. The results also give an indication of the type of skills required for proficient profiling.

No abstract

Although psychological profiling has achieved wide acceptance in law enforcement investigations, there has been little empirical research into the skills required for profiling. One attribute that is frequently cited as quintessential for effective profiling is experience in police investigations. In a study similar in design to Kocsis, Irwin, Hayes, and Nunn, this study examined the importance in profiling of investigative experience by testing groups of homicide detectives, senior police detectives, trainee detectives, police recruits, and undergraduate chemistry students. The chemistry students tended to produce the most accurate profiles of the perpetrator of a closed homicide case. Of all the groups, the chemistry students most consistently outperformed a control group given no information about the case when constructing a profile of the offender. There was also some evidence of an inverse relationship between investigative experience and profile accuracy.

Although criminal psychological profiling is frequently cited as being applicable to arson offenses, little empirical research exists to substantiate this claim. This study sought to build on previous studies conducted by Kocsis, Irwin, Hayes, and Nunn (2000) by examining the accuracy of professional profilers with others in constructing a profile of a serial arsonist in response to case information presented. The professional profilers produced the most accurate profiles, followed by a group of university science students. Senior detectives and fire investigators tended to perform the worst and never better than a control group that had no specific information about the crime and could do little more than guess. The results offer some insight into the requisite skills for effective profiling. The key factor appears to be a capacity for objective and logical analysis—a characteristic shared by science students and professional profilers.