Forensic Criminal Pyschology Offender Profiling Report

Order Description
Critically evaluate the FBI (clinical) approach and the British (statistical) approach to offending profiling.

Assignment no.2 is a 2500 word report on offender profiling; students are tasked with critically evaluating two diverse methodological approaches utilised by
psychologists to assist & guide the police in apprehending particular perpetrators of crime. They will consider the effectiveness of each approach, utilising a range
of evidence, including case studies, interviews, academic research, established reports and where appropriate statistical evidence. The rationale for this assessment
is based on the learning outcomes associated with developing students’ knowledge of psychology’s investigatory role in crime and its contributions to crime
reduction/prevention initiatives. In order to be successful in this assignment, students will need to demonstrate an ability to critically evaluate the effectiveness
of two diverse approaches to offender profiling, as well key research skills and an ability to utilise resources/evidence effectively to support their argument. Their
ability to think independently and make subsequent connections between theory, research and policy will be assessed in the final part of the report which requires the
student to utilise the material presented to devise policy recommendations. In relation to the broader learning outcomes, the assessment examines students’ research &
analytical skills, as well as their ability to critically evaluate – Offender Profiling Report brief

Brief introduction
• Briefly introduce the topic and outline how you are going to approach the report i.e. structure
• You will need to identify the two approaches you are evaluating i.e. FBI (clinical) and Statistical approach
• If you like provide a brief conclusive statement

Accurate description of diverse approaches
• Key principles of each approach included; clinical/experiential VS statistical/theoretical approaches, focus on mind/thinking VS behavioural focus, qualitative VS
quantitative research, typologies VS geographical profiling etc.
• Evidence for & against each approach; make use of empirical data/evaluative studies, case studies, statistical evidence etc.
• Key figures/dates for each approach

Evidence of critical evaluation (of effectiveness of each approach)
• Level of critical evaluation – in-depth, non descriptive
• Critique of each approach; balanced critical evaluation i.e. equally weighted
• Effective conclusion i.e. taking a view based on argument provided
• Policy recommendations; which approach, if any.

Quality of argument
• Strong/fair/weak
• Effective synthesis of argument; logically flows and each point logically linked

Scope/quality of sources/materials utilised for argument
• Range/scope of source material
• Up to date or old material?
• Material used going beyond lecture material/referenced material?

Creativity
• Interesting/exciting approach to question
• Synthesis of material and argument used creatively
Writing style
• Well written, grammatically correct?
• Effective structure? Sentences/paragraphs logically link/flow etc.
• Properly referenced in report/reference list etc.

General
• The extent to which the report addresses the assignment brief
• The extent to which descriptions of each approach were accurate
• Depth and scope of descriptions
• Keeping within word length