Discussion

Offender profiles provide police with an extremely generalized description, which could be matched with majority of the population. Barnum studies proposed that individuals demonstrate a subjective view on specific descriptions given to them, thus resulting in a higher level of acceptance. In connection with the Barnum studies, the current study, investigated how police officers interpreted vague profiles. The participants were randomly split into two different profile groups, genuine and bogus. Each participant was asked to rate the profile on account of: accuracy, helpfulness and how specific it was. The questions of accuracy, helpfulness and specifics were used as an aid to demonstrate if an ambiguous profile decreases chances of catching a perpetrator. Evidently, the hypothesis was confirmed by providing evidence that vague profiles can be interpreted differently; unclear profiles are the means for a large percentage of the population matching the description to be suspects. The results of the experiment showed that both profiles that were given out received a constant number. The participants with the genuine description had an 86% accuracy feedback and the bogus group demonstrated an 88% accuracy feedback. The groups did not differ from one another in terms of the uniqueness of the profile given. The genuine group gave a response of 74% with the bogus group agreeing with 73%. Overall both groups found the profile reviewed to be somewhat helpful with ratings of 71% for the genuine group and 74% for the bogus group. The two groups, (bogus and genuine,) recorded an accuracy and helpfulness value that was quite similar. These results occurred despite the fact that one profile was correct, and the other was the complete opposite. The results mentioned above clearly demonstrate that ambiguous profiling can be of no help for anyone needing help with an investigation. Although ambiguous profiles may send an officer on a goose chase, profiles can be extremely important for getting everyday people to come out with information that may help the case. However, profiling currently is not as helpful as a resource we once believed it is. The fact that profiles sometimes may not provide any key traits or signals, demonstrates that vague profiles will continue to subject innocent people as suspects. Officers may use an ambiguous profile as a means to use conformational bias on a certain suspect. For instance, if a profile depicts the subject as an outcast with a disability to make social connections, who is to say what classifies people in those categories? The perpetrator in the above example may actually be within a “popular,” group of people, however the officer may have had earlier suspicion of a person that sits in the back corner of the room all to themself. The officer with previous suspicion of the person at the back of the room will say that in his opinion this person is an outcast