利用犯罪现场行为衔接财物犯罪:方法比较

IF 0.8 4区 心理学 Q4 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Matthew Tonkin, Jan Lemeire, Pekka Santtila, Jan M. Winter
{"title":"利用犯罪现场行为衔接财物犯罪:方法比较","authors":"Matthew Tonkin,&nbsp;Jan Lemeire,&nbsp;Pekka Santtila,&nbsp;Jan M. Winter","doi":"10.1002/jip.1525","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study compared the ability of seven statistical models to distinguish between linked and unlinked crimes. The seven models utilised geographical, temporal, and modus operandi information relating to residential burglaries (<i>n</i> = 180), commercial robberies, (<i>n</i> = 118), and car thefts (<i>n</i> = 376). Model performance was assessed using receiver operating characteristic analysis and by examining the success with which the seven models could successfully prioritise linked over unlinked crimes. The regression-based and probabilistic models achieved comparable accuracy and were generally more accurate than the tree-based models tested in this study. The Logistic algorithm achieved the highest area under the curve (AUC) for residential burglary (AUC = 0.903) and commercial robbery (AUC = 0.830) and the SimpleLogistic algorithm achieving the highest for car theft (AUC = 0.820). The findings also indicated that discrimination accuracy is maximised (in some situations) if behavioural domains are utilised rather than individual crime scene behaviours and that the AUC should not be used as the sole measure of accuracy in behavioural crime linkage research.</p>","PeriodicalId":46397,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/jip.1525","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Linking property crime using offender crime scene behaviour: A comparison of methods\",\"authors\":\"Matthew Tonkin,&nbsp;Jan Lemeire,&nbsp;Pekka Santtila,&nbsp;Jan M. Winter\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jip.1525\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This study compared the ability of seven statistical models to distinguish between linked and unlinked crimes. The seven models utilised geographical, temporal, and modus operandi information relating to residential burglaries (<i>n</i> = 180), commercial robberies, (<i>n</i> = 118), and car thefts (<i>n</i> = 376). Model performance was assessed using receiver operating characteristic analysis and by examining the success with which the seven models could successfully prioritise linked over unlinked crimes. The regression-based and probabilistic models achieved comparable accuracy and were generally more accurate than the tree-based models tested in this study. The Logistic algorithm achieved the highest area under the curve (AUC) for residential burglary (AUC = 0.903) and commercial robbery (AUC = 0.830) and the SimpleLogistic algorithm achieving the highest for car theft (AUC = 0.820). The findings also indicated that discrimination accuracy is maximised (in some situations) if behavioural domains are utilised rather than individual crime scene behaviours and that the AUC should not be used as the sole measure of accuracy in behavioural crime linkage research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46397,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-03-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/jip.1525\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jip.1525\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jip.1525","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

这项研究比较了七种统计模型区分关联犯罪和非关联犯罪的能力。这七个模型利用了与住宅入室盗窃(n = 180)、商业抢劫(n = 118)和汽车盗窃(n = 376)有关的地理、时间和作案方式信息。模型的性能评估使用接收器操作特征分析,并通过检查七个模型的成功,可以成功地优先考虑有关联的犯罪而不是无关联的犯罪。基于回归的模型和概率模型达到了相当的精度,并且通常比本研究中测试的基于树的模型更准确。Logistic算法在住宅入室盗窃(AUC = 0.903)和商业抢劫(AUC = 0.830)的曲线下面积(AUC)最高,simplellogic算法在汽车盗窃(AUC = 0.820)的曲线下面积(AUC)最高。研究结果还表明,如果使用行为领域而不是个别犯罪现场行为,则(在某些情况下)歧视准确性最大化,并且AUC不应被用作行为犯罪联系研究中准确性的唯一衡量标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Linking property crime using offender crime scene behaviour: A comparison of methods

This study compared the ability of seven statistical models to distinguish between linked and unlinked crimes. The seven models utilised geographical, temporal, and modus operandi information relating to residential burglaries (n = 180), commercial robberies, (n = 118), and car thefts (n = 376). Model performance was assessed using receiver operating characteristic analysis and by examining the success with which the seven models could successfully prioritise linked over unlinked crimes. The regression-based and probabilistic models achieved comparable accuracy and were generally more accurate than the tree-based models tested in this study. The Logistic algorithm achieved the highest area under the curve (AUC) for residential burglary (AUC = 0.903) and commercial robbery (AUC = 0.830) and the SimpleLogistic algorithm achieving the highest for car theft (AUC = 0.820). The findings also indicated that discrimination accuracy is maximised (in some situations) if behavioural domains are utilised rather than individual crime scene behaviours and that the AUC should not be used as the sole measure of accuracy in behavioural crime linkage research.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
10.00%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: The Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling (JIP-OP) is an international journal of behavioural science contributions to criminal and civil investigations, for researchers and practitioners, also exploring the legal and jurisprudential implications of psychological and related aspects of all forms of investigation. Investigative Psychology is rapidly developing worldwide. It is a newly established, interdisciplinary area of research and application, concerned with the systematic, scientific examination of all those aspects of psychology and the related behavioural and social sciences that may be relevant to criminal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信