Vinsamlegast notið þetta auðkenni þegar þið vitnið til verksins eða tengið í það: http://hdl.handle.net/1946/39336
Aim: The present study examined the scope and contributions of Behavioural Investigative
Advice (BIA) and Forensic Clinical Psychology (FCP) reports from the National Crime Agency in the United Kingdom. The extent to which the reports met set professional standards was also evaluated.
Method: 77 BIA [full] and 36 FCP [10 full, 26 briefing] reports, written between 2015 and 2021, were content analysed using a comprehensive framework for measuring: (a) designated professional standards; (b) the grounds and backing for the claims made; and (c) the utility of the recommendations provided. Most of the reports involved murder and sexual offences. Results: The BIA reports met most standards with extremely high frequency. The 113 reports contained a total of 1843 claims of which 98% and 32% were based on grounds and backing, respectively. Most of the claims in the BIA reports involved a behavioural evaluation of the crime scene, while the FCP reports focus more on offender characteristics and mental health issues. The FCP reports were significantly higher in utility in terms of potential new investigative leads. There was no significant difference between the BIA and FCP reports in terms of behavioural analysis utility.
Conclusion: The BIA and FCP reports differ in terms of scope and contributions, but both provide in different ways valuable insight into understanding crime scene behaviours and offender characteristics.
|MSc_Tinna Dögg Sigurðardóttir.pdf||424.38 kB||Lokaður til...01.07.2023||Heildartexti|
|Tinna_Beiðni um lokun.pdf||480.05 kB||Opinn||Beiðni um lokun||Skoða/Opna|