# Is criminal profiling basically cold reading? (with a special call out to Ianzin) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 6, 2011, 8:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670 "2011-03-06T08:08:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2011, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670/201 "2011-03-09T19:47:12Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Care to talk about whether the specific profiling that is described in posts #1 and #5 work? Don’t know. Too vague to answer. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2011, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670/202 "2011-03-09T19:57:51Z")
The question remains-Does the type of profiling that is described in the OP work as is described by its proponents, or is it a bunch of cold-reading hooey, puffery and propaganda? I can see why the FBI promotes the use of its profilers-Good PR is good PR and all that. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2011, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670/203 "2011-03-09T20:06:23Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > OK, good. > > I think we’ve reached a pretty clear demarcation of what each of us means by “investigative utility.” > > You claim that homicide investigators asking about a murder victim’s enemies has no particular investigative utility. I say it has a self-evident utility. > > I’m content to let the reading audience draw their conclusions from here, and agree to disagree. The greater point is that you were making a false analogy. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2011, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670/204 "2011-03-09T20:16:00Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > The greater point is that you were making a false analogy. That’s fine. Here, too, we can agree to disagree; I think my analogy is self-evidently on point, and I’ll let readers of this exchange draw whatever conclusions they will. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2011, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670/205 "2011-03-09T20:16:10Z")
[Here is an extensive look at the history, use and usefulness of profiling](http://www.uwinnipeg.ca/academic/ddl/viol_cr/files/readings/reading22.pdf) by Damon Muller at the University of Melbourne(warning-pdf file). ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2011, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670/206 "2011-03-09T20:53:39Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > [Here is an extensive look at the history, use and usefulness of profiling](http://www.uwinnipeg.ca/academic/ddl/viol_cr/files/readings/reading22.pdf) by Damon Muller at the University of Melbourne(warning-pdf file). Wow. From your cite: > [@](#): > > The study by Godwin and Canter (1997) clearly demonstrates > that experimental psychology, and IP in particular, does have something > to offer police investigating serial crimes. Although psychological > profiling alone will not catch an offender, the aim is to supplement > police investigative efforts and give the police additional > information that might focus their investigation. That sure sounds familiar. Well, needless to say, your cite is very convincing, and I unreservedly adopt its findings. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2011, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670/207 "2011-03-09T20:54:33Z")
[Here is more on the subject](http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/may/15/criminal-profiling-jon-ronson) by Jon Ronson of the U.K. Guardian. Same conclusions as most of the other links in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2011, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670/208 "2011-03-09T20:56:37Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Wow. > > From your cite: > > That sure sounds familiar. Well, needless to say, your cite is very convincing, and I unreservedly adopt its findings. Can anyone point out what bit of trickery **Bricker** is engaging here? ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Scud](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/f08c70/32.png) [@Tom\_Scud](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Scud)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2011, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670/209 "2011-03-09T21:11:26Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Wow. > > From your cite: > > That sure sounds familiar. Well, needless to say, your cite is very convincing, and I unreservedly adopt its findings. So you would agree that > [@](#): > > The reality of profiling is that without > some solid theoretical and empirical basis on which to build a profile > of an offender,we may as well just base it on psychic visions. ? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2011, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670/210 "2011-03-09T21:12:49Z")
> [@Tom\_Scud](#): > > So you would agree that > > ? And **Tom Scud** gets it in one. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2011, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670/211 "2011-03-09T21:46:25Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Wow. > > From your cite: > > That sure sounds familiar. Well, needless to say, your cite is very convincing, and I unreservedly adopt its findings. Sounds like bluster to me. We still haven’t established that it provides information. In fact, I would say that it certainly does not. Even if you want to accept that it provides some guidlines for statistical probabilities, those statistics have no investigative utility when you go from the general to the specific. ---
**Author:** ![pravnik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8edcca/32.png) [@pravnik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pravnik)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670/212 "2011-03-10T04:58:11Z")
There seems to be some confusion between criminal profiling and forensic psychology. Criminal profiling is not a field of psychology, and forensic psychologists and psychiatrists do not typically make psychological profiles of “unsubs” to help law enforcement catch criminals. In a criminal setting, forensic psychologists and psychiatrists typically evaluate individuals after arrest to answer legal questions and testify in court regarding the person’s sanity, competency to stand trial, future dangerousness, rates of recidivism, and so on. There’s nothing bunk about this - DSM diagnoses directly bear on competence and sanity, and if you have an individual who has sexually offended against several prepubescent males in public and is psychopathic, that person can be statistically shown to be in a group that reoffends at higher rates than, say, nonpsychopathic incest offenders who offended against a female in private. Forensic psychologists and forensic psychiatrists are simply expert witnesses who are familiar with both legal standards and psychological and medical principles, and who use that knowledge to aid a jury in decisionmaking. Criminal profiling is a wholly different animal and is more the province of law enforcement officers than of psychologists, but it’s not completely useless - it’s as simple as a homicide detective concluding that a murder victim probably knew their killer because there’s no sign of forced entry or protracted struggle, and because most victims do. An example: in 1978, FBI agent Robert Ressler observed a bizarre, gruesome murder scene of a mutilated pregnant woman and made this profile of the killer: “White male aged twenty-five to twenty-seven; thin, undernourished appearance; single; living alone in a location within one mile of abandoned station wagon owned by one of the victims. Residence will be extremely slovenly and unkempt, and evidence of the crimes will be found at the residence. Suspect will have a history of mental illness and use of drugs. Suspect will be an unemployed loner who does not associate with either males or females and will probably spend a great deal of time in his own residence. If he resides with anyone, it will be with his parents. However, this is unlikely. Suspect will have no prior military history; will be a high school or college dropout; probably suffers from one or more forms of paranoid psychosis.” This turned out to be a pretty accurate description of [Richard Chase](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Chase), “the Vampire of Sacramento.” The profile was based on simple observations that the crime scene was evidence of an extremely disordered and psychotic person who made no effort whatsoever to conceal evidence in even the simplest manner, like wiping up bloody fingerprints and shoeprints, or even closing the front door of the house so the body couldn’t be seen from the street. A person like that probably has been hospitalized, doesn’t have very good personal hygene or nutrition, can’t stay in school or hold down a job, and has alienated both family and friends. They knew he probably lived nearby because he walked there and stole a car when he left, and they knew he probably had evidence in his house because he took body parts with him and didn’t seem concerned with being caught. This very easily could have been wrong - the killer could have turned out to have been the bank president, but it was a pretty good educated guess based on the evidence they knew. That’s all profiling is, guesses which occasionally turn out to be pretty good in retrospect. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 5:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670/213 "2011-03-10T05:23:19Z")
And the profile had nothing to do with catching the killer. it’s just post-hoc confirmation bias. Sure, sometimes they guess right, but that’s not really of any utility. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670/214 "2011-03-10T05:34:30Z")
The Mad Bomber of the 30’s, 40’s and 50’s closely matched his criminal profile. Pretty good profiling, but it had nothing to do with catching him. The profile predicted he had a grudge against Con Edison, since he planted several bombs in their facilities, but he was actually caught through good old fashioned police work. The man had sent several threatening letters to Con Ed, and a detective using old fashioned investigative techniques went through all of Con Ed’s archived complaint mail to find the guy. Profiling is guessing, and comes from the Sherlock Holmes school of detection. Something that works in fiction, and fails continuously in real life, often leading to innocent parties being charged or even convicted of crimes. If you find a cigar butt at a crime scene it may have DNA evidence on it, or if it’s not a common make it might even provide a lead to a suspect, but the supposition that a suspect has an oral fixation is not going to help solve a crime. ---
**Author:** ![pravnik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8edcca/32.png) [@pravnik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pravnik)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 5:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670/215 "2011-03-10T05:52:59Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > And the profile had nothing to do with catching the killer. it’s just post-hoc confirmation bias. Sure, sometimes they guess right, but that’s not really of any utility. The profile may have helped to some degree. A former classmate had a disturbing conversation with a grimy and disheveled Chase a few days later and told police, who ran a background check. They discovered that he had a history of mental illness and had once escaped from a mental hospital, he had been arrested for drugs, and lived close by. The profile wasn’t solely responsible for locating a killer, but I doubt you’ll ever find a case like that - you can’t arrest someone based solely on a profile. At any rate, it shows that criminal profiling doesn’t necessarily have to be outright lies and sham on the same level as cold reading - it can be based on common sense observations of evidence. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670/216 "2011-03-10T15:03:04Z")
> [@Tom\_Scud](#): > > So you would agree that > > ? Sure… as long as we post the complete quote: > [@](#): > > Frank Black, the main character in the television show Millennium, > has psychic visions of the murder being committed when he > visits a crime scene. If profiling worked like that in real life it would > probably simplify matters, with the ability to profile being just a > special talent that some people had. Unfortunately, it does not > work like that in real life. The reality of profiling is that without > some solid theoretical and empirical basis on which to build a profile > of an offender,we may as well just base it on psychic visions. If > we are to help the most people and realize the potential of profiling, > then we must accept that profiling requires much more work > and an open approach. Completely agree. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670/217 "2011-03-10T15:10:03Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Sure… as long as we post the complete quote: > > Completely agree. You keep pointing to these things as if they support your premise. I don’t follow, since I thought you were arguing that there was some evidence for the utility of criminal profiling. Your most recent quote says that there is no such evidence and that it is akin to psychic visions, which is the position I thought **Diogenes** was arguing, in opposition to yours. So what is it? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670/218 "2011-03-10T15:34:55Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > You keep pointing to these things as if they support your premise. I don’t follow, since I thought you were arguing that there was some evidence for the utility of criminal profiling. Your most recent quote says that there is no such evidence and that it is akin to psychic visions, which is the position I thought **Diogenes** was arguing, in opposition to yours. > > So what is it? That’s not what the quote says. The quote says that IF there is no theoretical and empirical basis on which to build a profile of an offender,we may as well just base it on psychic visions. It doesn’t say that DEFINITIVELY, THERE NEVER ARE theoretical and empirical basis on which to build a profile of an offender. And as the earlier quote I posted shows, the author agrees that there are: > [@](#): > > The study by Godwin and Canter (1997) clearly demonstrates > that experimental psychology, and IP in particular, does have something > to offer police investigating serial crimes. Although psychological > profiling alone will not catch an offender, the aim is to supplement > police investigative efforts and give the police additional > information that might focus their investigation. Indeed, the author refers to the precise study that I had already mentioned before this current piece was linked to. ---
**Author:** ![pravnik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8edcca/32.png) [@pravnik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pravnik)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670/219 "2011-03-10T15:49:04Z")
Yeah, I don’t think the author is equating profiling with psychics. I think he’s saying that profiling may have some validity but is still a long way from being any kind of rigorous discipline, which is a completely fair comment. He actually takes care to distinguish profiling and psychics: > [@](#): > > In asking profiling to be scientific, we are trying to establish > with some reliability whether profiling is of any use to us. Many > police officers have shown a great deal of skepticism about profiling, > partly due to the fact that they see apprehending offenders as > their particular area of expertise, but also because it is still such a > poorly developed field (e.g., Davies, 1994). As has been discussed > above, the experimental evidence is still not overwhelming, but > studies such as those conducted by Pinizzotto and Finkel (1990) > suggest that profiling might have some validity. Experimental > verification is not what will win the police over, however. Police > still persist in using psychics to help them solve difficult cases, > although Wiseman and West (1997) have shown experimentally > 258 HOMICIDE STUDIES / August 2000 > that there is absolutely no validity to the claimsmade by psychics in regard to criminal investigations. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2011, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670/220 "2011-03-10T16:06:56Z")
> [@pravnik](#): > > The profile may have helped to some degree. A former classmate had a disturbing conversation with a grimy and disheveled Chase a few days later and told police, who ran a background check. She told police not because of the profile, but because he matched a composite sketch of the suspect that people had seen driving away in a victim’s stolen car. The profile had nothing to do with it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-criminal-profiling-basically-cold-reading-with-a-special-call-out-to-ianzin/573670.md?page=12)