providing the necessary advanced skills to enable an individual to competently practice such analyses are required.
Interestingly, one argument suggests that because law enforcement officers are exposed to crime and the criminal justice system, this would have some value on their ability to use the appropriate logic and objective reasoning to support better analysis of this type. This
highlights the foundation of many debates surrounding training in criminal investigative analysis services because not everyone is specifically trained the same way, and not everyone possesses the same academic and experiential background. In an effort to examine at least some of these issues, the authors offer specific results of a recent study devoted to examining criminal investigative analysis and the necessary skills, training requirements, and expertise reported by actual practitioners of criminal investigative analysis.
RESEARCH STUDY
These results constitute part of a larger study that examined current issues and debates surrounding the practice of criminal investigative analysis. For this effort a sample of 40 subjects, comprising retired FBI personnel, individuals who formerly worked with the FBI’s practicing analysis unit, persons trained by the FBI, or FBI-trained individuals who have law enforcement experience in providing criminal investigative analysis services, were
interviewed for this study. All of them provided informed consent.
Required Skills
Respondents reported that the most essential required skill is not just law enforcement expertise but also experience in violent crime investigations. The respondents also indicated that those who practice this analysis should be knowledgeable of cognitive biases, research methodologies, and theories used and possess the ability to effectively communicate verbally and in writing. Specific training topics identified included forensic science, knowledge of specific types of crime, statement analysis, victimology, and interviewing. More general subject areas identified included psychology, criminology, and sociology as foundational academic training. One respondent highlighted the critical need for having experience as an all-around investigator.
Being an experienced investigator, having years of experience actually investigating cases...so you know the difficulties, you know the realities of what investigators are facing when they bring cases to you. Without that knowledge of how cases really work, and it isn’t necessarily the academic issue, and crime analysis. It is understanding how police agencies work and the roadblocks and how you get things done and how you deal with a difficult prosecutor and…how you deal with someone who wants to be the lead investigator. Real-life questions that investigators have to deal with. If you haven’t had to deal with these questions yourself, then you probably are not going to be very helpful.
Prerequisite Qualifications
Of all essential training, when asked a follow-up question of what, if any, important prerequisite qualifications should be required, investigative experience was reported most often at 57.5 percent with the second-most reported being developing an analytical mind at 30 percent (see table 1). One interviewee offered insight.
Police are generally more apt to seek help from someone they can relate to, so when you can talk about investigative experiences with them and have an understanding of what they’re doing in terms of their day-to-day activities, I think that is a real benefit.
Interestingly, 45 percent of participants indicated that a degree should not be required to practice criminal investigative analysis, but 40 percent said that it would be an asset to have an advanced degree. Even though 87.5 percent of the participants have advanced degrees themselves, 45 percent still believe that this practice can be done without a degree due to the experiential knowledge that can be acquired in training and experiences outside of an
academic institution. Table 1
Prerequisite Qualifications Necessary to Practice Criminal Investigation Analysis
Prerequisite Qualification Number of Respondents Valid Percent
Investigative Experience 23 57.5
Analytical Mind 12 30.0
Violent Crime Inv. Experience 9 22.5 Other 6 15.0 Open-mindedness 4 10.0 Drive 4 10.0 Knowledge of Police Agencies 2 5.0 Emotional Detachment 2 5.0 Understanding Research 1 2.5
Note: Percentages do not total 100 percent due to multiple responses.
Open-ended questions related to specific courses important to an overall training program yielded the following topics: forensics, forensic pathology, psychology and human behavior, crime scene analysis, specific types of crime investigation and crime typologies, scientific methods and research, risk assessment, threat assessment, statement analysis, knowledge of evidence and legal issues, and interviewing skills and strategies. There also was clear
evidence that any training should be a combination of classroom training and field mentoring by someone experienced in this form of analysis. A respondent explained the importance of on-the-job learning.
The more cases I worked, the more I started to feel more comfortable with it, and, so, in reality, the formal training that you can receive to become a profiler is not nearly as important as working the cases day in and day out and learning from a mentor, somebody who has been through the process before and has an impeccable reputation. That is how you become an analyst.
Ninety-five percent of the respondents also reported that training needs to stay in step with continuing education, whether it involves taking courses (85 percent), reading new
percent). It also was indicated that criminal investigative analysis training needs to be an ongoing process.
CONCLUSION
The authors have illustrated how this specialized criminal investigative analysis process varies in its application and presented some specific types of required training and skills. The value of these findings lies not in the academic consideration of these issues, but in
harnessing the perspectives of those who not only have been trained in criminal investigative analysis but who also have a long history of providing these services in case investigations. Regarding the skills and training required, this work clearly provides some evidence to shed light on the debate as to whether any investigative experience is necessary. Or, can only academic training suffice? The interview results illustrate that both investigative experience and formal training are essential to providing effective criminal investigative analysis services. Although the present study found investigative experience to be the most critical skill necessary to practice this analysis, logical and objective reasoning also were identified as important.
With that said, oftentimes, crime analysts or intelligence analysts are pressed into performing this type of behavioral analysis. Yet, many do not have adequate investigative experience and may have varying degrees of training in the application of this method. Does this affect the services provided? While this remains a debated question, the evidence from the experienced practitioners in the current sample would argue that investigative experience is of utmost importance, but academic and on-the-job training also can advance efforts in this area. Of course, it is noteworthy that the respondents in this study all had considerable experience themselves.
Perhaps, one solution to this and other issues pertaining to criminal investigative analysis can be found in the notion of creating a formal, standardized training process with the goal of licensing those who provide these services.[36] However, to do this, one researcher argues that criminal investigative analysis must become much more of a science than an art.[37] In contrast, others contend that criminal investigative analysis is a delicate combination of science and art that only investigative experience can appropriately balance to shed light on effective processes.
The next edition of the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin will feature part three in this series. The third article will address the issue of measuring outcomes and usefulness of criminal investigative analysis with regard to assisting law enforcement agencies in responding to violence in their communities.