Practicum Psychologia 6, 1-13

©The Author(s) 2016

http://unizikpsychologia.org/
ISSN: 2006-6640

Psychology of Crime Investigation

1Harry Obi-Nwosu, 2 Charles O. Anazonwu 3Chidozie Nwafor, & 3Chioma Agba
Department of Psychology, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka
1,2,3,&4
1 Email: [email protected]; [email protected]

Abstract
The paper defines criminal acts as behaviors that violate norms, to which the law attaches
punishments as deterrents. It explains that psychologists as human behavior experts apply
knowledge accruing form general and applied psychology to explain biological and
environmental motivations of crime, and the relationship between personality factors and
criminal behavior. It holds that in contemporary society, most criminal activities can be
explained by the economic model of crime which it considers an offshoot of the social
cognitive theory, and the rational choice theory, although a few cases of crime are
consequences of poor mental health (biological factors). The paper opines that crime
investigation which main goal is identification of perpetrators of crime involves analyses of
these factors alongside physical evidence at the crime scene and vital aspects of crime
analyses. It recommends massive involvement of qualified psychologist in the fight against
crime in Nigeria.

INTRODUCTION
In everyday language, the word crime has three perspectives: any behavior that
violet, or is against the law, any behavior that is punishable under the criminal
code of a state or an autonomous group, and any behavior that is ungodly
(immoral) or anti-social. Whichever definition, the common or obvious
denomination is that someone performed an action, set of actions or inaction that
is not agreeable to others in accordance with some norms. As a character, crime
causes pain, losses and damage of varying sorts and degrees to the perpetrator.
However for the purposes of this discourse, crime is defined as any behavior that
violates the criminal code for which a range of penalties exist upon conviction
(Bartol and Bartol, 2008).

The last two words of the later clinical definition of crime actually describe the
frontiers of the subjects that ineluctably tie criminal behavior to investigation,
which is the process of inquiring into, or studying an event, happening or person
with a view of gathering factual information or knowledge concerning same. In
criminology, investigation is best described as an examination process; a process
of scrutinization or research that uncovers hidden information about a crime.
Crime investigation is hence, the process or processes (methods of inquiry) that
authorities employ to find out hidden information (secrets) about who a crime

1
Harry et al.
perpetrator is/are, what motivated them, and possible remote involvements like
interrelatedness of crimes, purposes, persons and institutions. Crime investigation
is therefore a very vast and intricate multi-disciplinary subject. The totality of
which will not be covered in this paper. Nonetheless, a good overview, with
particular reference to the role of psychology will be attempted.

Psychology concerns itself with analyzing, understanding, controlling and

predicting behavior using scientific methods. Research in psychology involves
observation, experimentation, testing, and analysis to explore the biological,
cognitive, emotional, personal and social processes or stimuli that determine, or
interact to determine behavior. Psychological knowledge is applied in practice to
diagnose’ and remedy mental, emotional, physical and social dysfunctions: to
enable desirable behaviors in various settings and activities, for example,
Judiciary, law enforcement, training institutions and organizations. Psychology
also deals with intra personal dynamics with a view to understanding the
supposed constellation of behaviors, traits, attitudes and other characteristics that
distinguish individuals, and groups. Several theories and hypotheses have been
advanced by distinguished psychologists and criminologists to explain criminal
activities, and consequently, the place of psychological factors in crime, its
investigation, and control. However, contemporary theoretical basis is here under
presented.

Theoretical Basis of Criminal Behaviour

For many centuries, humans have tried to offer explanation as to what motivates
crime, so as to be able to control this behavior. In this paper, the more recent
theories considered germane to proper appreciation of the issues of discourse will
be briefly explained. These are the rational choice theory, and the Economic model
of crime.

These are chosen not because there is no biological explanation for crime, but
because criminal tendency consequent upon genetic aberrations or organic
neurological states account for less than 20% of total criminal activities in every
society.

The Rational Choice Theory is a theory of decision making, according to which ,

when faced with several options or possible courses of action, one chooses an
option perceived to offer the best outcome. According to proponents of this
theory, which focuses on the situational aspects of criminal behavior, criminals
rationally choose the particular crime(s) to commit, the particular target(s), as
well as the time and place so as to maximize desired outcome.

2
 Practicum Psychologia 6, 1-13
©The Author(s) 2016
http://unizikpsychologia.org/
ISSN: 2006-6640

This implies that an investigator should expect a difficult time, since it is expected
that the criminal must have made his or her calculations properly including
considerations concerning possible apprehension. It is conceivable that this
theory somehow relates more to organized crimes than to disorganized crimes.

The Economic Model holds that individuals choose same actions/reactions

whenever confronted with same alternatives in respect of costs, rewards, and
risks (Donohue, 2007). It follows that criminal behavior is a well thought out
behavior which the perpetrator carefully balanced the grains against the odds. The
criminal, a rather articulate person, explores perceived costs, rewards, and risks of
alternative courses of action, and makes his/her decisions on the most rewarding:
one that has the least possible cost.

It should be noted that costs are calculated based on capabilities and capacities of
individual and groups. Hence, the level of crime or the kind and targets, depend on
the perpetrators accumulated ‘wealth’ (contacts, experience, and equipment). This
also relates to the possibility of encountering law enforcement agents.

The economic model seems to be quite informative when considering motivation

for crime, the resources often expended on high profile crimes and the extent of
sophistication of criminal activities currently being observed. In this connection
then, the theory becomes consequential to crime investigation and prevention.

Another theory that has to be mentioned here is the Routine activities theory,
which states that in order for a crime to be committed, the following specific
conditions must be in place: there must be a motivated offender, a suitable target,
as well as absence of a capable guardian (criminology wiki). This school holds that
criminals are not impulsive or unpredictable; rather, they balance the costs and
benefits of the crimes they commit. Theorists of this persuasion imply that: self
interest motivates offenders, and that many more number of individuals within a
milieu than could be imagined may be motivated to commit crime.

Following these assumptions, the investigator or crime preventer would expect

certain kind of crimes in certain locations or localities, and not others. Thus, it is
more likely for car theft to occur in middle class settings, and text book theft to
occur on college grounds.

Condensing the propositions of these theories, one is persuaded that the social
cognitive theory stands out as the single most complete theoretical explanation
for crime in contemporary societies (excepting biological explanations). It follows
that social factors, including values and dynamics combine with an individual’s
3
Harry et al.
assessment of his/her abilities in juxtaposition with the level of perceived risk
(safety factors) determine which crime, when, and who the target of crime would
be (Obi-Nwosu, 2008).

From this perspective, the crime investigator has to inquire into these factors in
every case of crime and must not haste to conclusions until exhaustive exploration
of interrelatedness of these factors is done. Accordingly, questions concerning
possible motivation for each individual’s crime, each crime, choice of victim
(including possible vulnerability characteristics), choice of attack arena, and
whether or not it seems properly planned or accidental on a particular victim
ought to be teased out. It is probably drawing on this that psychological profiling
of criminals is becoming popular.

The Crime Scene

Since the oil that greases the wheel of crime investigation is physical evidence,
which encompasses any and all objects that can establish that a crime has been
committed, or can provide a link between a crime and its victim or a crime and its
perpetrator (Saferstein, 2001), it is incumbent on investigators to ensure the
availability and validity of such materials for forensic lab examinations and for
other analyses. For this purpose, the crime scene needs to be barricaded within
reasonable radius, the materials adequately collected, preserved, and transported
to appropriate laboratories. Also, multidimensional and systematic photographs of
the scene in its ‘natural state’ should be taken as soon as practicable for proper
study. Where available, video recording of the crime scene is very helpful and
should be taken. It is from these recordings that investigative sketches are made.

It is preferable to record the crime scene before searching for physical evidence,
since this systematic and thorough search may dislocate some features of the
scene that may offer significant clues on the methods, motivations and
organization of the perpetrator, or some victim characteristics. Experts choose
patterns of search (eg spiral or grid method) depending on the size and structure
of the scene, as well as the number of evidence collectors that are participating.

Since admissibility of evidence in court depends on its authenticity and scientific

validity. It is incumbent on investigators to handle the items with utmost
professionalism. Again, track of every official person who handled such evidence,
and for what (chain custody) must be properly documented for judges and
defense counsels to be convinced that adulterations have not occurred. It must be
noted however, that irrespective of the unequivocal need to make the crime scene
free from contamination, health personnel should not be barred from assisting
injured people in crime scenes, nor fire fighters restricted in cases of arson.
4
 Practicum Psychologia 6, 1-13
©The Author(s) 2016
http://unizikpsychologia.org/
ISSN: 2006-6640

Criminal Identification
Criminal identification is the main goal of crime investigation. Other goals include:
identifying the motivating factors, victim related factors and possible remote and
immediate facilitators of crime. To identify a culprit, it is traditional to do
laboratory examinations of biological evidence as well as other materials. Some of
the examinations involved are blood, DNA, and finger prints examinations.

Blood stain(s) examination start with making sure that it is human blood, then
checking how closely it could match a particular individual’s blood. Laboratory
examinations (e.g. precipitin or gel diffusion tests) confirm human blood, then, full
serological test to assay blood enzymes and proteins that could discriminate blood
samples should be carried out. These enzymes and proteins according to
Saferstein (2001), include adenosine deaminase (ADA), Adenylate kinase (AK),
carbonic anhydrase II (CAII), erythrocyte acid phosphate (EAP), esterase D (EsD),
glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD), glyoxylase1 (GLO1), group-specific
component (Gc), hepatoglobin (Hp), [peptidase A (Pep A), phosphoglucomutase
(PGM), 6-Phosphogluconate dehydrogenase (6PGD), and transferring (Tf).
Additionally, the investigator should not forget the value of blood stain pattern
since its possible origin and trajectory of property analyzed will give significant
impetus to the understanding of events at the crime scene.

Scientists have proven that Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) chains structure are
highly individualized, with every person having certain peculiar and identifiable
DNA character, and members of the same biological families having specific
common characters.

The forensic psychologist may not fully understand the DNA chemistry or
structure but should be able to understand circumstances where such tests are
called for so as to refer samples for appropriate laboratory examinations. Whether
there are ready suspects or not, provided that the services are available, it is
advisable to get DNA tests done on all human samples so as to:
i. Figure out the possible number of active people around the crime scene.
ii. Identify perpetrator(s) if arrests are made and profiles or other information
point to many (at least more than one) person.
iii. As a major differentiation/ confirmation test when other substantial
information points to a person and the person strongly denies (especially for
supposed first offender)

It should be noted that collection and presentation of biological samples require

some safety measures. First is for the investigators to avoid contamination/
infection with contagious and infectious diseases, and second is to ensure that the
5
Harry et al.
samples remain valid and useable for laboratory tests. This means that if the
forensic psychologist is a private investigator, he/she should be equipped to
collect ‘uncontaminated’ samples and preserve same appropriately for valid
laboratory examination.

Finger Prints are also very important in crime investigations since they are the
most easily available unique feature of every individual. To date, no two fingers
have been found to posses similar ridge idiosyncrasies. Indeed, it is not the
obvious patterns of the ridge that discriminate, but the ridge characteristics,
known as minutiae, which describes the ridge endings, bifurcations, enclosures,
and other details. Finger prints may not always be obvious but latent in crime
scenes. Visible prints could be seen through ink or paint marks, dirt/ or blood.
Plastic prints are those impressed on soft surfaces, sand/dust, soap grease, wax, or
the like, and latent prints are those that are not obvious. These are seen and
developed through technology, for example the reflected ultraviolet imaging
system. Other methods of identifying latent finger prints include Iodine Fuming,
and physical Developer: a silver nitrate based liquid reagent (Kendall and Rehn,
(1983).

Finger prints ‘tell’ who had been in the crime scene, sometimes it ‘tells’ who the
criminal is: ‘sometimes’ because since most people already know about this
method of identification, most criminals ‘leave no finger prints’. However it is still
quite useful in furthering investigation and must never be neglected.

It shall be stressed that many other objects/items including (but not limited to)
clothing and shoes and parts of these, utensils, toys, and anything that seem not to
be a usual component of the immediate environment could be useful clues to what
and how about the crime, and possibly who did it. As minute evidence as super
imposed colour on an item of furniture, a shoe mark, or torn pieces of paper may
have to be examined for information. The investigator should also be able to
classify the crime as organized or otherwise from the assessment of the crime
scene, speculate gang or individual involvement, and guess personality attributes
of both perpetrator and victim.

Evaluation of Witness Testimony

Broadly speaking, witnesses could be dichotomized into the ordinary, and the
expert witness. The first category consists of all persons who testify in a court of
law on both sides of the adversarial divide, not minding their positions, knowledge
or other demographics. Expert witnesses are so labeled because they are called
upon to testify just in respect of their skills. Their testimonies are supposed to
assist the trial judge(s) tease technical issues that may twist a case. Many a time,
6
 Practicum Psychologia 6, 1-13
©The Author(s) 2016
http://unizikpsychologia.org/
ISSN: 2006-6640

the court herself invites such persons through subpoena, although in many
jurisdictions, both the prosecution and defense may call in an expert witness
especially to assist to authenticate/validate (or otherwise) an evidence, or to
address competency or culpability issues on ground of mental or physical health
status. In the latter case the admissibility and weight of the evidence depends on
the perception of the bench.

One of the most formidable challenges of forensic psychology practice is the

assessment of reliability and validity of witness testimonies: What is true/correct,
and what is not, and what may have been crafted to deceive the court.
Traditionally, the cross-examination process opens the chance on the opposition
and court to try to figure this out. Unfortunately, most clever attorneys are able to
preempt cross-examination questions, hence prepare their witnesses to succeed in
deceiving the court. Forensic psychologists therefore have to employ their skills to
solve this dilemma. One may deliberately tell lies, or may be saying what he/she
honestly believes to be the truth, which is not actually so (recall the gestalt law of
closure). This is a major complication to forensic psychological practice at this
level, especially as it has become clearer that the polygraph cannot help here, and
cannot help in cases of habitual liars or psychopaths, since no alteration in
physiology on which the machine depends may occur irrespective of how obvious
their lies may be. This shortcoming of the polygraph accounts why most courts
reject it’s evidence.

The forensic psychologist is left with the option of skillfully harnessing

information generated through assessment and psychological testing. In this
regard, not minding how cumbersome it could be, personality assessment with a
battery is indispensable in any consequential case. The primary purpose of such
assessment is to capture ‘the person of the witness’ so as complement information
from the interview. Lawyers and Psychologists often advocate the ‘put him off
guard’ technique in which the witness is first asked distant questions that may
seem irrelevant and provocative, before the main questions, often in a leading
form. Some Judges may not allow lengthy ‘side’ questions or leading questions, but
others, especially in criminal trials allow larger latitude to both sides.

Eye contacts during interrogation (interview) often help to suggest whether an

answer is straight from memory, or modified. To this end, it may be beneficial to
ask questions that require sentences instead of ‘yes’ or ‘no’. Sluggish responses
suggest reservations. Again, same information previously denied could be elicited
through appropriately reframed questions asked when unexpected. Follow-up
questions craftily constructed often expose faking witnesses since it is usually
difficult to make up detailed sequential lies.
7
Harry et al.
Personality and Crime
Miller and Lynam (2001) in a Meta-analysis reported that both low agreeableness
and low conscientiousness consistently predicted various kinds of delinquency
and offending. Their findings with respect to dimensions of neuroticism,
extraversion, and openness are more complex and inconsistent. For example,
neuroticism was significantly related to self-reported interpersonal violence
among undergraduate men, whereas self reported vandalism and theft correlated
with neuroticism for men but not for women.

In another study with two different samples, neuroticism and extraversion failed
to predict self-reported delinquency for both sexes (Heaven, Caputi, Trivellion-
Scott, & Swinton, 2000). Likewise, neuroticism, extraversion, and openness were
not significantly correlated with self-reported offending in a sample of prisoners
in a release-preparation program, whereas agreeableness and conscientiousness
did correlate significantly with offending (Wiebe, 2004). Conversely, Dennison,
Stough, and Birgden (2001) compared different types of sex offenders with non
offenders and found significant differences for neuroticism, extraversion, and
conscientiousness. Taken together, these studies suggest that neuroticism,
extraversion, or openness were not consistent predictors of delinquency. Although
openness appears hardly associated with criminality, some studies do support this
relationship. For instance, a study by Clower and Bothwell (2001) revealed that
openness and conscientiousness were the only FFM factors that were related to
number of arrests. This is not in contradiction with the results from meta-analysis
conducted by Miller and Lyann (2001), which found link to antisocial behavior
only for conscientiousness and agreeableness, and a moderate link for
neuroticism.

Herzberg and Hoyer (2009) in a study applied a person-centered approach based

on five-factor model of personality to organize personality data of criminal
offenders and examine psychological differences between resulting prototypes. In
the first study, 91 offenders were administered the NEO five factor (IIP), the
Borderline Personality Inventory, and the White Bear Suppression Inventory. In
the second study of 102 offenders, the researchers again used the NEO-FFI, IIP,
and additional self-report instruments measuring psychopathological symptoms,
social interaction problems, and functional and dysfunctional forms of self-
consciousness. Cluster analyses revealed five prototypes that replicate previous
ones from non-offender studies. Subsequent analyses demonstrated systematic
and psychologically meaningful differences between these groups in their
tendencies to behave, think, and feel.

8
 Practicum Psychologia 6, 1-13
©The Author(s) 2016
http://unizikpsychologia.org/
ISSN: 2006-6640

The findings indicated that this pattern showed good similarity to the five-cluster
solutions found by other researchers (Roth & von Collani, 2007) and especially to
the prisoner sample investigated by Herzberg and Roth (2006). The first cluster
(n=17, 18.7% was characterized by low scores in neuroticism and above average
scores on all other scales, and it clearly resembles the resilient prototype. The
second cluster (n=5, 5.5%) was characterized mainly by two dimensions, namely,
high scores in neuroticism together with low scores in extraversion, whereas the
scores on the remaining scales were average. This cluster could be identified as
the over-controlled prototype. The third cluster (n=22, 24.2%) was characterized
by above average scores in neuroticism and low scores in extraversion, openness,
and conscientiousness, whereas on agreeableness were average. This cluster
resembled the under-controlled prototype. The fourth cluster (n=38, 41.8%) was
characterized by moderate negative scores in neuroticism and moderate positive
scores on the remaining scales. This cluster showed a strong similarity to
confident prototype derived by Herzberg and Roth (2006). Finally, the fifth cluster
(n=9, 9.9%) had low scores in neuroticism and openness, high scores in
conscientiousness, average scores in extraversion, and moderate high scores in
agreeableness. Therefore, this cluster represents the reserved prototype. The
findings, derived from two independent samples, confirm the hypothesis that
offenders were not a homogenous group in terms of personality and that an
established person-centered approach grounded on the FFM can successfully be
applied to this population. This is in accordance with observations in forensic
settings that offenders show striking differences in their habitual tendencies to
act, think, and feel, explaining that any of the domains of FFM can be predisposed
to different crimes, and at different levels.

If the foregoing brief review on personality and criminality is juxtaposed with the
findings of Tenibiage (2010), that prisoners scored higher in extraversion,
neuroticism and psychoticism (using EPQ) than non prisoners, and that of Obi,
Nwankwo, Agu, et al (2013), that Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and
Extraversions significantly predicted tendency to commit crime, it becomes
obvious that even though some traits may (if certain moderating factors ‘go
between’) increase susceptibility to commit crime, there is no trait that is a
criminal trait.

Personality therefore is a secondary factor which becomes significant when

studied alongside moderating variables like SES, Location and Exposure. This
again strengthens the theoretical framework, earlier exposed in this paper, and
strongly supports the view that the number of possible criminals in a society is
unimaginable. This is why it has been advocated that investigators should not take
any clue for granted, no matter how insignificant it may seem at the face value.
9
Harry et al.
Offender or Criminal Profiling
This is often described as the third wave of investigative science, after the older
ones of studying cues, and crime analysis. It is defined as a method of identifying a
crime perpetrator by analyzing the nature of the crime, the manner it was
committed, and various aspects of the offenders personality make up through his
choices before, during, and after the crime (Fulew & Wrightsman 2008). According
to Holmes and Holmes (2002), the three main goals of offender profiling are:
1. To provide law enforcement agencies with a social and psychological
assessment of the criminal.
2. To provide them with a psychological evaluation of belongings found in the
possession of the criminal.
3. To offer suggestions and strategies on the process of interview (to enhance
the chance of positive outcome).

Four main approaches to profiling were aptly captured by Ainsworth (2001) thus:
i. The geographical approach, in which the patterns are analyzed vis-à-vis timing,
and location of the crime scene so as to find out where the offender lives and
works.
ii. Investigative psychology, which focuses on the use of psychological theories
of analysis to determine the characteristics of the offender by assessing the
presented offender behavior and style of committing crime.
iii. The typological approach, which looks at the specific characteristics of crime
scene for the purposes of categorizing the offender into the various ‘typical’
characteristics (descriptions).
iv. The clinical approach, which analyses psychiatric and psychological
characteristics of the offender to determine whether or not there is any
mental of psychological abnormality.

To enhance sequential analyses, profilers divide the schema into four: First phase
(Antecedents) seeks to aggregate the offender’s plan, fantasy or both, and
addresses such questions as whether the crime (eg murder) had plans earlier,
what fantasies, what might have triggered the offence at particular times, days or
places, and not others.

Second phase is the method(s) and manner of offence: the type of victims, how is
offence executed (eg shooting, stabbing or strangulating or poisoning….). The
third phase is Body disposal that is in cases of murder; is the body abandoned at
the same crime scene or taken elsewhere? Then, in other cases what efforts at
concealing crime or distracting investigators is made. Then the Fourth phase is the
post offensive behavior, in which the profiler seeks to find out if the offender

10
 Practicum Psychologia 6, 1-13
©The Author(s) 2016
http://unizikpsychologia.org/
ISSN: 2006-6640

wants to join the investigation team by reacting to media reports or contacting law
enforcement agencies.

Putting these together, profilers sometimes try to predict when, where, and the
next possible victim of the ‘wanted’ criminal. It should be noted, that some
profilers opine that case linkage which involves analysis of cases to obtain discrete
connections between two or more previously unrelated cases is a distinct phase of
profiling.

Sequel to the foregoing, psychological assessment of offenders and victims

becomes very consequential proactive investigative tool. Every offender and
victim should be properly and professionally assessed and tested psychologically,
and a data bank on common traits, personality, psycho-social, psycho-
physiological, and psychopathological characteristics built up within every
division (geographical or economic region). Such information ‘fitted against’ crime
trends, modus operandi, and political-economic climate enhance the configuration
of crime data which facilitate investigation of future crimes.

Summary and Conclusions

Crime investigation is multi dimensional and multi-disciplinary. Its main goal is to
apprehend crime perpetrators, thus enhance security of lives and property.
Psychology as a discipline is indispensable in crime investigation because as
human behavior experts, psychologists also understand criminal behavior more
than other professionals. Besides laboratory analysis of physical crime scene
evidence, psychological assessment of the crime scene must be carefully
undertaken, else, faulty assumptions would be made, and culprits may never be
apprehended.

Psychological theories of criminality galvanize the thoughts of experts on

motivations and sustaining factors of criminal behavior postulations. Considering
the propositions of the Rational Choice Theory, the Economic Model, and the
Routine Activity theory, the emerging model depicts the social cognitive theory of
crime, which emphasizes that most crimes are properly contemplated and
executed in such a way as to make it difficult, if not impossible for investigators to
identify the perpetrator(s). However, there are crimes that are not instrumental;
though just a few. Such offending are commonly referred to as reaction to a
perceived threat or dangerous situation. They are often the impulsive and
thoughtless reaction to proactive behavior whether imagined or real, geared
towards protecting physical or psychological self. Additionally, it is noted that
adverse psychological health status (mental Health) also predispose to violence

11
Harry et al.
and crime, but such crimes are not really statistically significant, and can only be
addressed through improved community mental health hygiene.

Major psychological input to crime investigation through offender profiling; a

method of identifying criminals by analyzing the nature of the crime, the manner it
was committed, and various aspects of personality of the offender through his
choices before, during and after offence is currently engaging researchers.
Psychological data banks of offenders and offences should also be maintained in
every jurisdiction to enhance quick and productive crime investigation.

References
Ainsworth, P. (2001). Offender Profiling and Crime Analysis. Cullompton, Devon,
Willan Publishing.
Bartol, C.R. & Bartol, A.M., (2008). Introduction to Forensic Psychology Research
and Application. London, SAGE.
Clower, C.E. & Bothwell, R.K. (2001). An Exploratory Study of the Relationship
between the big five and Inmate recidivism. Journal of Research in
Personality, 35 (2): 231-237
Stough, C., & Birgden, A. (2001). The big 5 dimensional personality approach to
Understanding sexual offenders Psychology, Crime and Law. 7, 243-61.
Donohue, J. J. (2007). Economic Models of Crime and Punishment. Social Research,
74. (2) 379-412.
Fulew, S. & Wrightsman, L. (2008). Profiling Violent Crimes: An Investigative Tool.
London, SAGE.
Heaven, P. C. L., Caputi, P., Trivellion-Scott, D., & Swinton, T. (2000). Personality
and group influences on self-reported delinquent behavior. Personality and
Individual Differences, 28, 1143-1158.
Herzberg, P. Y. & Hoyer, J. (2009). Personality Prototypes in Adult Offenders,
Criminal Justice and Behavior 36; 259 Originally published online Dec. 16,
2008: DOL:10.1177/00385480328331.
Herzberg, P.Y., & Roth, M. (2006). Beyond resilients, under controllers, and over
controllers? An Extension of personality prototype research. European
Journal of Personality, 20, 5-28.
Kendall, F. & Rehn, W. (1983). Rapid method of super fuming application for
development of latent Finger prints. Journal of forensic sciences 28, 777-
780.
Miller, J. D., & Dollard, J. (2001).Structural models of personality and their relation
to antisocial Behavior: A meta-analytic review. Criminology, 39,765-798.
Obi, T. C., Nwankwo, B. E., Agu, S.A., Aboh, J.U. & Sydney-Agbor, N. (2013).
Influence of Personality and Age on Attitude towards Crime among
12
 Practicum Psychologia 6, 1-13
©The Author(s) 2016
http://unizikpsychologia.org/
ISSN: 2006-6640

Adolescents. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science (IOSR-JHSS)

Volume 17,( I) 80-86.
Obi-Nwosu, H. (2008). Psychological themes. Awka: Demecury Publishers.
Roth, M., & von Collani, G. (2007). A head-to-head comparison of Big-Five types
and traits in the prediction of social attitudes: Further evidence for a five-
cluster typology. Journal of Individual Differences, 28, 138-149.
Saferstein, R. (2001). Criminalistics: An introduction to Forensic Science. London,
Prentice Hall.
Weibe, R. P. (2004). Delinquent behavior and the five-factor model: Hiding in the
adaptive Landscape? Individual Differences Research; 2, 38-62

Biography

Dr. Harry Obi-Nwosu is a senior lecturer and a Clinical Psychologist at the

Department of Psychology, Nnamdi Azikiwe University Awka, Anambra State
Nigeria. His research interests include impact of governance on the citizens’
psychological wellbeing, adapting forensic assessment to suit cultural belief,
governance and identity formation and psychosomatic symptoms.
Email: [email protected]; [email protected]

Dr. Charles O Anazonwu is a senior lecturer and a Social Psychologist at the

Department of Psychology, Nnamdi Azikiwe University Awka, Anambra State
Nigeria. His research interests include impact of governance on the citizens’
psychological wellbeing, Peace and conflict resolution
Email: [email protected]

Dr. Chidozie Edwin Nwafor is a Developmental Psychologist and a lecturer at

Department of Psychology Nnamdi Azikiwe University Awka Nigeria. His
Primary research interest include psychological wellbeing of children and
early adults; theory of mind and behavior development.
[email protected]
Agba Chioma Cynthia is a technologist at Nnamdi Azikiwe University Awka
Anambra State. She has penchant for research and community development.
She is also interested in research on crime and crime control
[email protected]

13