Do you think that MBTI would be a useful tool in criminal profiling?

[Mr. Sherlock Holmes]

I think since it is simply a categorical system it would be more reliable than a lot of profiling methods and would be quite useful in predicting the persons movements. So long as you didn't draw your conclusions too early, I think it would be quite useful. But I'd like to hear what you think.

 

[Lark]

Well I think most profiling systems are flawed and prevent people thinking outside the box a lot of the time which can have terrible consequences when it comes to apprehending the worst offenders, plus they give rise to all kinds of learning fails when they are integrated into training. People learn the minute detail, which can result in a sort of knowing the letter of the law instead of the spirit of the law, if you know what I mean.

It also would require really accurate information, a lot of self-report information would be inaccurate, you've got to allow for all the input fails or errors and all of that takes resources, possibly away from the real perps too.

 

[Totenkindly]

The problem with profiling is that you have to be REALLY good in order to be able to do anything with it because it has to deal with so much ambiguity. Usually the worst problem with profiling (IMO) is reading too much into something, rather than allowing the ambiguous to remain ambiguous.

I also think that people who are good at it are good temperamentally: It's not really the training that makes the difference, it's the innate perspective and flexibility inherent within it. The training just gives words to what they already see. Along those lines, maybe MBTI would give them language by which to express what they already see; but in criminal profiling, they're focused on specific known patterns of criminal/sociopathic behavior and are sort of beyond MBTI as a language. There's already language that exists within their lexicons for traits that appear in MBTI.

 

[nozflubber]

what makes you think it hasn't already been used for that purpose? i think one of the most useful pieces of information would be whether someone was istj or intp or what not - it would spell out where/under what circumstances they would slip up.

 

[Mr. Sherlock Holmes]

what makes you think it hasn't already been used for that purpose? i think one of the most useful pieces of information would be whether someone was istj or intp or what not - it would spell out where/under what circumstances they would slip up.

I don't know if it's in use. I was just asking if it would be a good thing to use. I haven't heard of it being used before though. And I agree. If you could figure out someones type from their motive, choice of victims, method of killing etc. it would probably be easier to predict their decisions based on a types natural inclination.

 

[Sioul]

I definetly see pros and cons to this. If there were some way where we could pinpoint the exact type of the accused, then yes absolutely, typology would most likey be a great help to try and explain actions and try and retrace steps.

I find the problem is that it is hard to properly identify someones exact type without also having some context in regards to their life.

It also depends on who the identifer is as well, an NF person would probably have an idea of what he/she thinks the accused is, and any ques that they receive would lead them to making very quick assumptions. And if the criminal was incorrectly identified, then its like the blind leading the blind.

 

[nozflubber]

a good thing to use in terms of effectiveness, or in terms of ethics? because its totally contrary to what the test makers want it to be used for.

i dunno about predicting behaviors exactly, thats hard to do... i like the idea of trying to infer where they will slip up...... where exactly, can they get sloppy? a sloppy or stressed INTJ will cover certain tracks better than a sloppy ESFP would..... yanno what i mean? and where/when did they go wrong or break down? that is key to know....

to continue using an ESFP/INTJ comparison, the ESFP running-from-the-law vs intj, i think would be more prone to hedonism and indulgence, and i would set up screening stations based upon that, their vices! Catching the INTJ is probably going to be tricky by comparison, or more subtle. An INTJ will have their vices in control or check, or IF they need to release them, will do so in a very controlled, to-their-own environment situation.

an INTJ criminal will have property, because they might buy a farm to do their criminal shit in privacy and in control. a criminal ESFP would run around, find a random farm/deserted place to do whatever, then burn it if needed, then get the hell out of dodge.

differences!!

 

[Robopop]

Those dirty little STPs.

 

[skylights]

yes. they'd never suspect me

seriously though, it's a fascinating idea, but i'm afraid that the potential stereotyping it would lead to would outweigh the potential benefit. perhaps our rates of catching criminals would rise a bit but we would also analyze what type is most likely to be criminal, etc., and in what situation, and i fear a courtroom where a personality typing is used against someone as "evidence".

 

[Mr. Sherlock Holmes]

yes. they'd never suspect me

seriously though, it's a fascinating idea, but i'm afraid that the potential stereotyping it would lead to would outweigh the potential benefit. perhaps our rates of catching criminals would rise a bit but we would also analyze what type is most likely to be criminal, etc., and in what situation, and i fear a courtroom where a personality typing is used against someone as "evidence".

That's a good point. Well I guess IF they ever implemented it, they would have to be careful to avoid that and to keep what types the criminals were a fairly close secret.

 

[highlander]

Interesting idea. I was curious and pulled down this.

http://www.sagepub.com/upm-data/23999_1___Psychological_Profiling.pdf

It doesn't seem like MBTI would be the best profiling tool for this particular purpose. I know little of the subject but would think other tools would be better suited that one concerned with prioritization of cognitive functions. Enneagram might be a little more interesting in this regard though - looking at the unhealthy levels for example.

As Jennifer states, the profilers are looking more at abnormal behavior.

Along those lines, maybe MBTI would give them language by which to express what they already see; but in criminal profiling, they're focused on specific known patterns of criminal/sociopathic behavior and are sort of beyond MBTI as a language.

 

[Emectar]

I think its a very interesting idea, although i admittedly know nothing about criminal profiling haha

the one thing i think might be an issue is that criminals might often be so mentally out of whack that they might not behave or fit neatly into any types, (once again i really have no idea what im talking about).

 

[Venom]

I used to be one of those, "It wouldnt be ethical to target people based on personality"... but then I realized how effective personality is on NFL quarterbacks! Seriously, every year there is a big debate in the NFL draft and about recently drafted players. They all have physical tools to succeed. Some people blame the situations they are put (bad teams often draft these NFL hopefuls!).

I've noticed that in general:

SJs struggle with being a "gunslinger". They fail to step up to the plate and just "gun it" down the field. The SJ QBs generally either go to their first read, or to their check down reciever (they dont go through the progressions of looking at their different receivers). They can't handle when the play goes differently than planned.

Examples: Ryan Leaf (ESTJ), Jason Campbell (ISFJ), Kerry Collins (ISTJ). These QBs either flop, or have marginal success when allowed to stare all damn day at their first target (and wait for him to get open).

NJs dont seem to have these same "OCD lock onto my first receiver" issues. They often are very vocal leaders of the team, and have a good ability to get on their team mates case. These are the OCD perfectionists that still maintain the ability to see plays through a break down. They know their play books inside and out. They can approach the line with a zillion adjustments at a moments notice. They are perfectionists, but they somehow aren't crippled by it (as the SJ QBs are).

Examples: Peyton Manning (ENFJ), Rich Gannon (ENTJ).

ENXP QBs are the "cool" under pressure QBs. These are the guys who thrive under the tight situations. They literally seem like the luckiest guys in the world sometimes (as these types often seem in real life). They are risk takers, but benefit from exceptional intuition that lets them see things before they unfold. They aren't just risk takers in that "gunslinger sense". They are mental risk takers in their predictions and intuitions.

Examples: Tom Brady (ENFP)

ESXPs QBs are the gunslingers. They have no issues with slinging the ball down the field. They bounce back from mistakes. They energize their team mates. They are competitive, but are not OCD about it. They just "get it done" (when the physical talent is there of course). The ESTPs may benefit from slightly better decision making. The ESFPs may benefit from slightly better "cheerleader" qualities (energizes the team!).

Examples: Brett Favre (ESFP), Philip Rivers (ESTP)

In general, QB drafting/selecting would be a lot better with these "rules":
<> Must be E (possible exceptions ISTP or INTJ)
<> Cannot be SJ
<> Must be compelled to put in lots of study either because they "care" (ENFJ, ENFP, ESFP) or are damn competitive (ESTP, ENTJ). (possible exceptions for ENTP).

I guarantee that no ISFJ will be winning a superbowl any time soon. Go ahead and try this out on any pro QB that you feel you have gotten a good glimpse at personality wise!



If it works for QBs...what else could it work for???

 

[highlander]

I used to be one of those, "It wouldnt be ethical to target people based on personality"... but then I realized how effective personality is on NFL quarterbacks! Seriously, every year there is a big debate in the NFL draft and about recently drafted players. They all have physical tools to succeed. Some people blame the situations they are put (bad teams often draft these NFL hopefuls!).

I've noticed that in general:

SJs struggle with being a "gunslinger". They fail to step up to the plate and just "gun it" down the field. The SJ QBs generally either go to their first read, or to their check down reciever (they dont go through the progressions of looking at their different receivers). They can't handle when the play goes differently than planned.

Examples: Ryan Leaf (ESTJ), Jason Campbell (ISFJ), Kerry Collins (ISTJ). These QBs either flop, or have marginal success when allowed to stare all damn day at their first target (and wait for him to get open).

NJs dont seem to have these same "OCD lock onto my first receiver" issues. They often are very vocal leaders of the team, and have a good ability to get on their team mates case. These are the OCD perfectionists that still maintain the ability to see plays through a break down. They know their play books inside and out. They can approach the line with a zillion adjustments at a moments notice. They are perfectionists, but they somehow aren't crippled by it (as the SJ QBs are).

Examples: Peyton Manning (ENFJ), Rich Gannon (ENTJ).

ENXP QBs are the "cool" under pressure QBs. These are the guys who thrive under the tight situations. They literally seem like the luckiest guys in the world sometimes (as these types often seem in real life). They are risk takers, but benefit from exceptional intuition that lets them see things before they unfold. They aren't just risk takers in that "gunslinger sense". They are mental risk takers in their predictions and intuitions.

Examples: Tom Brady (ENFP)

ESXPs QBs are the gunslingers. They have no issues with slinging the ball down the field. They bounce back from mistakes. They energize their team mates. They are competitive, but are not OCD about it. They just "get it done" (when the physical talent is there of course). The ESTPs may benefit from slightly better decision making. The ESFPs may benefit from slightly better "cheerleader" qualities (energizes the team!).

Examples: Brett Favre (ESFP), Philip Rivers (ESTP)

In general, QB drafting/selecting would be a lot better with these "rules":
<> Must be E (possible exceptions ISTP or INTJ)
<> Cannot be SJ
<> Must be compelled to put in lots of study either because they "care" (ENFJ, ENFP, ESFP) or are damn competitive (ESTP, ENTJ). (possible exceptions for ENTP).

I guarantee that no ISFJ will be winning a superbowl any time soon. Go ahead and try this out on any pro QB that you feel you have gotten a good glimpse at personality wise!



If it works for QBs...what else could it work for???

Right now, Kyle Orton (SJ?) is looking better than Jay Cutler (SP?)....