Other studies have supported these findings and conclusive evidence presented has offered distinct patterns in reinforcing the behavioral context that serial killers have. Sociology examines the serial killer through the lens of criminology rather than from a psychological standpoint.
The American public is commonly fascinated by cruelty and horror as noted by characters such as Hannibal Lecter and Michael Myers of Silence of the Lambs and Halloween respectively.
Eric W. Hickey, author of Serial Murders and Their Victims , finds that serial killers kill over a period of time. Experts in the field of sociology have marked this definition as needing to be a bit more descriptive in context because it is rather open ended in trying to explain serial killers. However, consensus in the field of sociology has found the premise useful.
Criminology, then associates statistical data when discussing serial killers. Serial killers are assessed through quantitative and qualitative data to ascertain the frequency of committing, and why the crimes occur. Educated guesses have been proposed on the biological explanation of why serial killings occur and criminologists have found that fear is the greatest motivator for serial killers.
In fact, individuals understand that fear is a powerful emotion and thus violence makes each and every one of us fearful. In spite of sociological research, little is still known about serial killers and their reasons. One prominent form of thought in the area of sociology is the McDonald Triad. Through this framework, an understanding of serial killers is ascertained through comprehending the early warning signs. This they say allows for law enforcement and other arenas of protection of society to have preventative measures in place.
The theory suggests that. Gottfredson and Hirschi even go as far as to say that "self-control is fully formed by the fifth grade.
Those who develop poor self-control will fail throughout life in adapting to social norms. The theory in effect seeks to link self-control to childhood. Almost all research on the subject of serial killers states that childhood is the undercurrent of why serial killers act the way they do and Gottfredson and Hirschi's theory confirms that.
With the self-control theory, the thought is that the relationship between one's parents is what builds the life of the man or woman. Sears in his book, To Kill Again , reasons that a lack of nurturing and proper love is the reasons for abuse in the serial killer.
From a sociological standpoint, knowledge is not gained by the young child as to how individuals should act in society. Kids that grow up in this type of environment do not establish meaningful relationships and do not connect on any type of levels i. Sexual connection is removed as well. Gottfredson and Hirschi do not address the improper raising of children and this has often been noted by sociologists in profiling serial killers. What about them? This is why the world of criminology has opted to shine the light on reasons why serial killers commit crimes, but have not been able to definitively express one specific reason.
Self-control theory is deficient then for many reasons as it does not form a variation in the improper socialization between sexes. Serial killers are simply difficult to understand. This is understood when researchers are proposing certain theories in their predictions as to why individuals perform the acts that they do. It is important to note that the theory is more compatible with the understanding of serial killers than it is not. Literature has exhibited that characteristics associated with the theory are more in line with the development of the personality of the serial killer potentially guiding the light toward more sociological comprehension of what makes the serial killer tick.
Need an APA paper? Ultius can do that! Sociologists have also studied the social positions of serial killers. Exploration into this topic has yield enlightening perceptions about deviance and identity in the serial killer. A specific theory here is the communication theory of identity which provides a thorough understanding of the identities of serial killers within the framework of society.
It draws attention to how serial killers manage their identities. When examining deviance and the communication theory of identity, sociologists are able to state that deviance is often related to serial killers. Deviance is a major representation of the identity and the interpretation of that identity. Qualitative research regarding serial killings does not tend to address serial killers but more so is a presentation of the types of identities of serial killers.
It more so seeks to investigate the identity of the serial killer in society. A growing body of literature has explored the topic of serial killers and sought to further try and identity how that individual manages themselves in society.
Lagrange and Milburn denote that one's identity is developed over the course of one's life. Social roles and memberships to certain groups are also highlighted as giving meaning and prominence to one's identity. The complex nature of identity is what connects the world of sociology and psychology. Communication theory of identity then identifies that identity is the byproduct of communication Henson and Olsen. In other words, through communicating with people in society; individual identities are formed and created.
Serial killers have frequently been categorized by law enforcement as being either organized or disorganized. Organized killers typically plan their kills in advance, while disorganized killers lack the strategic impulses to plan their kills and are less choicy about their victims and the characteristics that they should embody.
The distinction between the organized and disorganized killer is noted as one of geography as organized killers are harder to catch. Their spatial behavior changes accordingly: organized killers tend to travel far and wide, while disorganized ones strike relatively close to home" Warf and Waddell. Law enforcement has tried to develop certain techniques to catch organized killers using sociological research the same that can be found in research papers from Ultius.
It is essential that serial killers be understood within the larger framework of societal relations. Society in essence manufactures, enables and constrains their mental state as research has suggested. Although there are a variety of theories that exist on the subject and even larger generalizations that have been made to better apprehend the mind of the serial killer, it is demonstrably evident that they live and kill within varying sets of social conditions.
In attempting to move the discussion of serial murder toward consideration of structural factors, Leyton agrees with feminist analysts of serial murder Cameron and Frazer ; Caputi ; ; Both seek to expand the study of serial murder beyond examination of individual pathology.
They argue there is a connection between social structure and serial murder. Leyton looks toward class structures, while feminists examine patriarchy. Expanding the definition in this way allows the analyst to assess the societal contexts which shape and nurture individual pathologies. No research technique is foolproof. Whether qualitative or quantitative techniques are used, both methods pose particular problems for the researcher of serial killers. This section examines these problems showing how misuse and misapplication of research techniques contributes to the stereotypes associated with serialists.
Any textbook on qualitative research lists potential methodological problems. These problems include difficulties in gaining access to subjects, difficulties with the reliability of the information provided by the subjects, and the possibility of interviewer bias or contamination. We will examine each of these issues as they impact upon the study of serial murder. Gaining access to research subjects is a problem for all researchers, but is particularly difficult when studying serial murder.
Access to subjects may be denied for many different reasons. Access may be restricted by penal institutions, or by the killer's lawyer s O'Reilly-Fleming Sometimes subjects simply refuse to cooperate. They may not see an advantage for themselves in agreeing to be interviewed. Even when they agree to be interviewed, many may be unwillingly or unable to talk freely about their crimes Holmes Quite apart from problems of gaining access, there are problems with reliability.
It is common for researchers to inadvertently bias or contaminate the data. Hickey argues that some researchers conducting lengthy interviews with serialists may become too close to their subjects. They may unconsciously contribute to the notoriety of the killer, providing him or her with the publicity he or she seeks.
Sometimes serial killers engage in gaming, telling the interviewer what they think the interviewer wants to hear Hickey Others may revel in the glory and attention by making themselves and their stories fit the image. They may confess to more murders than they committed. Clearly, if not properly attuned to the killer's attempts to manipulate the interviewer, the interviewer may pass on the killer's misinformation.
An additional problem with data gathered via interviews is that these interviews are retrospective. This causes additional problems and the interviewer must consider the length of time that has passed between the murders and the interview. Interviews, of course, are not the only sources of data. For example, Leyton relied upon newspaper accounts, diaries, case studies, criminal justice system records, and other archival information.
None of these sources is completely reliable. Newspaper accounts, for example, sometimes provide extensive details about specific serialists. These details are usually based on trial testimony, but may sometimes be supplemented with other information obtainable through investigative journalism.
Journalists, however, are notorious for reporting hearsay. They are often accused of being more interested in getting a story than in disseminating accurate information. The news media are also renowned for an emphasis on sensational crimes to the exclusion of more mundane murders which do not fit the stereotype Jenkins Kiger Thus, newspaper accounts are a major source of misinformation. Biographies, diaries and case studies, while rich in descriptive data, may also be sources of misinformation.
Criminal records, trial transcripts, abstracts and archival information are as reliable as the information they contain and there is little reason to believe these sources contain all the necessary information. Further, a case history may be selected for its sensational appeal. This is clearly what led to the production of at least four mass market books Burnside and Cairns ; Davey ; Pron ; Williams claiming to give the true story of the exploits of Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka.
As Ratner puts it, specific cases draw attention because their exotic nature appeals to the voyeur. The problem here is that these case studies are skewed in favour of stereotypical images or public expectations of the characteristics of serialists. By failing to critically assess the sampling bias which enters into the selection of "suitable" material, stereotypes are perpetuated. A more critical assessment of this material may lead to the conclusion that they do not hold any theoretical interest.
For example, the books published in an attempt to cash in on the notoriety of Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka offer slightly different versions of the events, and significantly different explanations for why Homolka did what she did Burnside and Scott ; Davey ; Pron ; Williams Even though these books base their accounts on court evidence, readers would find it confusing that the evidence presented from one book to the other is sometimes contradictory.
Davey, Pron and Burnside and Cairns portray Homolka as an abused woman who killed while under the domination of an abusive, violent husband. Williams, as well as Pearson , another commentator on this case, implies that Homolka was far from a submissive and abused woman. These authors argue that she was an active and willing participant in the deaths of the three school girls. The point here is that even books based on similar records, including court records, are not necessarily going to give the reader an accurate interpretation of the data.
Most experts agree that the number of serial murders and of serial murderers is unknown Egger a; Gresswell and Hollin ; Hickey ; Holmes ; Holmes, Hickey and Holmes ; Jenkins ; Maxfield ; O'Reilly-Fleming It has been estimated that between 10 and serial killers are active at any time in the United States Egger a; Kiger ; O'Reilly- Fleming In Canada, estimates range from 5 to 30 Ratner These alternative data sources have been used primarily because official data are not reliable.
The intention is to reflect all criminal offenses that come to the attention of the police. The data, however, are incomplete and unreliable. First, because reporting is voluntary, the information is incomplete Kiger ; Williams and Flewelling Second, there may be organizational pressures within particular police jurisdictions not to alarm the public about the possible existence of a serial killer in that area.
Third, homicide data records only those crimes known to the police. Missing persons and undiscovered bodies are excluded. The importance of this third observation is that many unidentified bodies are found each year and there have been attempts to link the number of unidentified bodies to serial murder. Annual estimates in the United States place the number of unidentified dead between 4, and 5, Some authors claim that many of these are victims of serial killers.
For example, Radford estimates that most the 3, unidentified female victims of murder each year in the United States are victims of serial murder.
This is an unwarranted claim which Jenkins has clearly denounced:. The actual proportion of the unidentified dead who are the victims of serial murder is unknown Hickey Egger a; Jenkins Kiger In the United States, it is not mandatory for coroners to report the discovery of unidentified bodies to a centralized data bank.
Also, coroners need no formal training for the position. Their reports to the FBI may contain unreliable information about the cause and time of death Kiger Further, cause of death cannot be determined from badly decomposed bodies, which are then unlikely to be counted as homicides. Sometimes, bodies may be found where cause of death can be classed as homicide, but the victims were killed in previous years.
These victims are not likely to be submitted as additions to a revised homicide count for that year Kiger Moreover, many victims of a serial killer may not be classed as homicides at all. They may be assumed to have died of natural causes eg. As a result, homicide rates are underestimated and the consequent analyses are inaccurate Jenkins ; Kiger ; Williams and Flewelling They do not necessarily reflect the actual number of deaths in a given year. At this point, numerical estimates of serial killers and victims based on this data are questionable.
Thus, it is unwarranted to assume that serial killing is on the rise as has sometimes been claimed. Skip to main content. Faculty Sponsor Department Public Health. Abstract The current qualitative study sought to investigate the top 10 serial killers, with the highest confirmed kills, in the United States between the s. Included in Public Health Commons. Search Enter search terms:. Digital Commons.
0コメント