Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAlmond, Louise
dc.contributor.authorAlison, Laurence
dc.contributor.authorPorter, Louise
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-03T15:52:14Z
dc.date.available2017-05-03T15:52:14Z
dc.date.issued2007
dc.date.modified2010-08-13T07:24:29Z
dc.identifier.issn15444767
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/jip.59
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/33437
dc.description.abstractThis study examined the content of a contemporary sample of behavioural investigative advice reports produced by the National Policing Improvements Agency (NPIA), formally known as the National Centre for Policing Excellence, and compared this sample with previous offender-profiling samples reported by Alison, Smith, Eastman, and Rainbow in 2003. Forty-seven reports written in 2005 were content analysed. The reports contained 805 claims, although 96% of the claims contained grounds for their claim, only 34% had any formal support or backing. In terms of confirmability, 70% of the claims were verifiable. However, only 43% were falsifiable, in that they could be objectively measured post-conviction. Analysis also showed that there were differences when comparing the different types of claims made (i.e. behavioural, temporal) and the different types of reports compiled by the NPIA (i.e. behavioural assessment report, linking report, etc.) Comparisons show that there is a very large positive difference between the contemporary behavioural investigative advice sample and previous non-NPIA expert advice in terms of the substantiveness of their arguments. Contemporary NPIA behavioural investigative advice has clearer boundaries around the claims made and presents material in a more coherent and evidence-based format than previous expert advice.
dc.description.peerreviewedYes
dc.description.publicationstatusYes
dc.languageEnglish
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherJohn Wiley
dc.publisher.placeChichester, England
dc.relation.ispartofstudentpublicationN
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom71
dc.relation.ispartofpageto83
dc.relation.ispartofissue2
dc.relation.ispartofjournalJournal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling
dc.relation.ispartofvolume4
dc.rights.retentionY
dc.subject.fieldofresearchPsychology not elsewhere classified
dc.subject.fieldofresearchCriminology
dc.subject.fieldofresearchPsychology
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode170199
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode1602
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode1701
dc.titleAn evaluation and comparison of claims made in behavioural investigative advice reports compiled by the National Policing Improvements Agency in the United Kingdom
dc.typeJournal article
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Articles
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articles
gro.date.issued2007
gro.hasfulltextNo Full Text
gro.griffith.authorPorter, Louise E.


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record