Offender Profiling and Criminal Inferences, law homework help Question description   Forensic psychology addresses scientific questions about criminal actions, where the understanding of the actions leads to inferences about offender characteristics. Canter (2000) introduced the radex of criminality, the combination of quantitative and qualitative aspects of a crime. In addition, these quantitative and qualitative characteristics are viewed through the prism of development and change over time. The radex can be applied to any criminal behavior. One of the most important investigative events of the last century was the creation of behavioral analysis units (BAUs) by the FBI. There are three BAUs. They are known not because of their ability to solve serial murders but because of their creation of a database, the Violent Criminal Apprehension Program (ViCAP), on which criminal justice professionals around the country and even the world have relied ever since. Offender character assessment is the derivation of inferences about a criminal from evidentiary and psychological aspects of the crimes he or she has committed. For this process to move beyond deduction based on personal opinion and supposition to an evidence-based science, a number of aspects of criminal activity need to be examined, analyzed, and categorized. The notion of a hierarchy of criminal differentiation is introduced to highlight the need to search for consistencies and variations at many levels of that hierarchy. However, current research indicates that the key distinctions are those that differentiate, within classes of crime, between offences and between offenders. This also leads to the hypothesis of a circular ordering of criminal actions, analogous to the color circle, a radex. The radex model, tested using multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) procedures, allows specific hypotheses to be developed about important constituents of criminal differentiation: ·         Salience: MDS analyses reveal the importance of the frequency of criminal actions as the basis on which the significance of those actions can be established. ·         Models of differentiation: The research reviewed mainly supports distinctions between criminals in terms of the forms of their transactions with their explicit or implicit victims. ·         Consistency: Offenders have been shown to exhibit similar patterns of action on different occasions. The most reliable examples of this currently are in studies of the spatial behavior of criminals. ·         Inference: Under limited conditions, it is possible to show associations between the characteristics of offenders and the thematic focus of their crimes. In general, these results provide support for models of thematic consistency that link the dominant themes in an offender’s crimes to characteristic aspects of his or her lifestyle and offending history. We never analyze anything in isolation but compare new information to the existing knowledge about similar past and parallel events. Both psychological evaluations and crime investigations follow this pattern of determining what a criminal is and what a crime is. That is what the radex model addresses. INSTRUCTIONS In your main post: ·         Analyze the different components of the radex model of criminal differentiation, looking at expressive and instrumental criminal conduct against person and property on a continuum of increasing seriousness. ·         Include in your analysis a summary of the domains and a critique of how they can be or cannot be useful for forensic psychology and for criminal justice professionals. What are the limitations you see in relying on this approach?

Transtutors Week five June 16, 2019 Use the APA format to support all the answers, with a minimum of 5 scholarly resources. Answer questions 2, 3, 4, 8, and 8 from Chapter 13, Exercises, pp. 360 On Key Concepts, from Jackson and Trochim, Donnelly, and Arora. The Title of the book is: Research Methods and Statistics: A Critical Thinking Approach 4th edition. These are the questions listed numbers 1 to 5 in this attachment, plus other questions on part one and part two in this attachment. Part one of the assignment answers even numbered questions of chapter 13, page 360, of Jackson (2012), plus six more questions. Part two of the assignment answers six questions. The question in both part one and part two are list as follows. Part One A psychology professor is interested in whether implementing weekly quizzes improves student learning. She decides to use the weekly quizzes in one section of her introductory psychology class and not to use them in another section of the same course. Which type of quasi-experimental design do you recommend for this study? If the psychology professor in above question had access to only one section of introductory psychology, describe how she might use a single group design to assess the effectiveness of weekly quizzes. Which of the three single group designs would you recommend? Identify some possible confounds in each of the studies you outlined in your answers to question 1 and 2 above. Give the reasons a researcher might choose to use a single-case design. How does a multiple-baseline design differ from a reversal design? Describe the advantages and disadvantages of quasi-experiments? What is the fundamental weakness of a quasi-experimental design? Why is it a weakness? Does its weakness always matter? If you randomly assign participants to groups, can you assume the groups are equivalent at the beginning of the study? At the end? Why or why not? If you cannot assume equivalence at either end, what can you do? Please explain. Explain and give examples of how the particular outcomes of a study can suggest if a particular threat is likely to have been present. Describe each of the following types of designs, explain its logic, and why the design does or does not address the selection threats discussed in Chapter 10 of Trochim, Donnelly, and Arora (2016): a. Non-equivalent control group pretest only b. Non-equivalent control group pretest/posttest c. Cross-sectional d. Regression-Discontinuity Why are quasi-experimental designs used more often than experimental designs? One conclusion you might reach (hint) after completing the readings for this assignment is that there are no bad designs, only bad design choices (and implementations). State a research question for which a single-group post-test only design can yield relatively unambiguous findings Part Two – Answer the following questions: What research question(s) does the study address? What is Goldberg’s rationale for the study? Was the study designed to contribute to theory? Do the results of the study contribute to theory? For both questions: If so, how? If not, why not? What constructs does the study address? How are they operationalized? What are the independent and dependent variables in the study? Name the type of design the researchers used. What internal and external validity threats did the researchers address in their design? How did they address them? Are there threats they did not address? If so, how does the failure to address the threats affect the researchers’ interpretations of their findings? Are Goldberg’s conclusions convincing? Why or why not?