Loading…
This event has ended. Visit the official site or create your own event on Sched.
The Asia Pacific Association of Threat Assessment Professionals (APATAP) Committee is excited to announce that our annual conference will be held at Disneyland, Hong Kong from 25 - 27 February 2019.

Our conference theme this year is “Online threats, offline lives: Reality and Practice of Online Threat Management”. This is a highly relevant theme to today’s society and reflects current advancements in the use of technology and social media in assessing and managing global, local, and individual-level threats.

We invite all mental health, law enforcement, security, workplace health and safety, and other professionals tasked with the prevention and response of behavioural risks to join us in this learning and networking opportunity.
Wednesday, February 27 • 10:15am - 10:45am
Unravelling the Inductive-Deductive Debate in Behavioural Investigative Advice

Sign up or log in to save this to your schedule and see who's attending!

Feedback form is now closed.

There is often heated debate regarding the practice of behavioural investigative advice. Some have vocally claimed that all approaches can be distinguished by their use of inductive or deductive reasoning, with the latter argued to be superior. This paper examines this position and notes that these are far from novel arguments. Indeed, psychology has long recognised the nomothetic-idiographic debate begun by Windelband (1894) and popularised by Allport (1937). It is argued that the dearth of natural laws in behavioural science means that offender profiling and other forms of behavioural investigative advice can rarely achieve the lofty goals required by formal deductive logic. Accordingly, even the most “deductive” profiling opinion is inherently probabilistic. Indeed, an examination of published deductive profiling reports will reveal the application of Piercean abductive reasoning rather than deduction. Such profiling, like other purely idiographic prediction methods, includes an insufficient anchor for decision-making and is prone to bias. Drawing upon the nomothetic-idiographic literature, Bayesian decision theory, pragmatism, and structured decision-making, it is concluded that reliable and flexible behavioural investigative advice necessarily requires an inductive anchor. This provides a fertile ground from which abductive hypotheses can be made in the individual case. Future directions for research and practice will also be described.

Speakers
avatar for Michael Davis

Michael Davis

Consultant Forensic Psychologist, Michael Davis Forensic Psychology Pty Ltd
Dr Michael Davis is a Forensic and Clinical Psychologist in full time private practice. He is an adjunct re-search fellow in the Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science at Swinburne University of Technology, an adjunct senior lecturer in the Department of Psychiatry at Monash University... Read More →


Wednesday February 27, 2019 10:15am - 10:45am
Sleeping Beauty Ballroom, Conference Centre, Hong Kong Disneyland Hotel