Ethics and the Art of Profiling

Debating the Value and Ethical Concerns of Psychological Profiling
Introduction
A psychological profile is created by combining individual profiles, such as a victim profile with an offender profile or a geographical profile and even a DNA profile. Through the combination of individual profiles, the psychological profile emerges with a comprehensive view of the type of person most likely to be found at a particular place at a particular time with such and such type of victim or such and such type of crime/offense being committed. Psychological profiling is both an “investigative aid” and a “conceptual tool” that is used by police to understand cases and create leads (Wilson, Lincoln & Kocsis, 1997, p. 1). Vorpagel (1982) described psychological profiling as the exercise of identifying “behavioral patterns, trends, and tendencies” used to develop a complete picture—not just of the individuals involved in a crime—but of the type of individuals who would likely be involved in crimes of a similar nature in the future. As such psychological profiling has been viewed as a key tool in the development of criminal justice. However, critics have claimed that it unfairly generalizes and creates ethical issues that should be of concern for criminal justice professionals. This paper will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of psychological profiling, the ethical concerns, and the approaches that can be used to overcome them.
Advantages
The advantages of psychological profiling are: (a) it gives law enforcement personnel the opportunity to work with mental health experts to identify patterns of behavior that can be linked with specific types of criminal activity, (b) it allows for a database to be created with profiles developed based on real cases that can be used to help law enforcement personnel solve cases and in some instances even prevent crimes from occurring, and (c) profiles can be established that will predict not just criminal behavior but ordinary behavior as well, which allows a complete picture of a suspect to be created (Kocsis, 2003; Wilson et al., 1997). In short, the art or science of psychological profiling allows law enforcement agents to follow a standard that can be applied to crime scene investigation to help sort out the myriad facts and details of a case, reduce the risk of human error in an investigation, and provide officers with a more robust and fuller description of the type of individuals to be on the lookout for as they pursue a case (Egger, 1999).
Disadvantages
Profiles can be and often are flawed to some degree (Wilson et al., 1997). Snook, Cullen, Bennell, Taylor and Gendreau (2008) note that psychological profiling is not as efficient as its proponents make it out to be: it is often ineffective or at best inconsistent at providing any sort of predictive value in a case; its reputation among investigators is based more on anecdotal evidence than on scientific or empirical proof; the argument in favor of profiling is typically based on authority, which is a logical fallacy; and whenever profiling is used to solve a case, it could well be argued that the investigators in these instances are creating their own meaning out of what amount to essentially ambiguous facts that are then interpreted to fit the nature of the case as it develops (Snook et al., 2008).
For these reasons, the value of psychological profiling is controversial: it is a topic that is divisive, with some believing it offers an advantage to criminal investigators and brings value to the field of criminal justice; others claim that the empirical evidence of profiling’s validity has yet to be offered and that the practice is merely suggestive and does not lead to a higher success rate in terms of prosecuting crime.
Ethical Concerns
As with any type of profiling, whether racial, DNA, geographical, or psychological, there are ethical concerns and issues that have to be addressed. One of the main ethical issues with psychological profiling is the lack of uniformity among the various approaches to the practice. Both inductive and deductive approaches to profiling occur; inductive approaches take findings from a case and apply them to theory; deductive approaches take theories and apply them to cases. Because so many different fields—from forensic nursing to forensic anthropology to forensic psychiatry and FBI agency—apply profiling, the lack of standardization, or even any discussion of standardization, creates problem areas among the various disciplines. In order for the science of profiling to be promoted with a view towards overcoming some of the ethical issues of validation and authenticity that critics decry, some professionalization is required.
However, there are no special training requirements for profiling, as it is still a relatively new art. There is no certification or degree that one is required to obtain in order to claim profiling proficiency. This lack of educational guidelines is another obstacle that raises ethical concerns about psychological profiling (Kocsis, 2003). Without a clear understanding of what is required to profile correctly or effectively that can be shared across disciplines, it is unlikely that any sort of profiling professionalization or standardization will be achieved any time soon. Getting the various fields to work together to achieve this educational standard requires teamwork, collaboration and interprofessional communication on a large scale. Many profilers moreover like the idea of taking a creative license or liberty when it comes to creating or employing a psychological profile. In other words, the activity may very well be more art than science.
As a result, there are no ethical standards in and of themselves related to the practice of profiling. Without such standards, those who engage in the practice may violate ethical codes that would be applied in other sciences, such as psychology, without realizing it. Ethical standards are important for any profession and if psychological profiling is to be taken seriously as a science it desperately needs to address the issues of standards—both professional standards that will ensure a scientific and empirically-based approach to profiling, and an ethical standard that can ensure professional profilers know what lines not to cross, and what types of profiling would be a violation of ethical norms accepted across disciplines.
Other ethical issues, such as the dignity and rights of victims and their families, the need for anonymity and confidentiality, the need to guard against bias; the need for impartiality, and the need for proper reporting standards are just a few more examples of what professionals need to consider as they take the ethical concerns of profiling more seriously. No science can be fully mature until it has tackled the issue of ethics and how to deal with standards and regulations, and the art of profiling will not become a science until it has done exactly that.
Overcoming Ethical Issues
Overcoming these ethical issues is something that can be achieved with the help of the organizational aims of the Academy of Behavioral Profiling, which is a group that was established partly to address the issue of ethical concerns among those practicing the art or science of profiling. An ethical code of conduct was one of the tools that the group sought to create—and having this code would be a great tool in overcoming the main issue of psychological profiling ethics, which is a lack of ethical standards.
The Academy of Behavioral Profiling indeed did create an ethical code of conduct and one of the ethical standards it stipulated was that professional profilers work together to increase the concept of professionalism or standardization in the field of profiling in general. Standards regarding confidentiality, bias, independence, reporting, and the need to protect the dignity of victims and their families are all issues that need to be addressed in the field of profiling. If identities are not protected, the basic civil rights of people might be violated. It is an imperative, therefore, the professional profilers take note of the Academy of Behavior Profiling’s recommendations.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the advantages of psychological profiling are that it provides law enforcement officers the opportunity to work with a variety of other professionals across several disciplines, from mental health to forensic anthropology, to better understand the psychology of crime. It also helps to provide leads and a better understanding of the elements that go into the perpetration of a crime. At the same time, there are disadvantages: it is not yet an exact science, as it lacks empirical evidence to back up its claims. However, with the help of adhering to an ethical standard, such as a code of conduct and pursuing the need to realize standardization of the methods used in profiling, a more robust and ethically-mindful system can be established. This will help the art of profiling become a real science.
References
Egger, S. A. (1999). Psychological profiling: Past, present, and future. Journal of
Contemporary Criminal Justice, 15(3), 242-261.
Kocsis, R. N. (2003). Criminal psychological profiling: validities and abilities. 
International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 47(2), 126-144.
Snook, B., Cullen, R. M., Bennell, C., Taylor, P. J., & Gendreau, P. (2008). The criminal
profiling illusion: What's behind the smoke and mirrors?. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35(10), 1257-1276.
Vorpagel, R.E. (1982). Painting psychological profiles: charlatanism, coincidence,
charisma or new science. Police Chief, 3(8), 156-59
Wilson, P., Lincoln, R., & Kocsis, R. (1997). Validity, utility and ethics of profiling for serial violent and sexual offenders. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 4(1), 1-11.