Testing the Organized/Disorganized Model of Sexual Homicide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The FBI’s organized/disorganized typology has been used extensively as a tool to classify sexual homicide and develop offender profiles. The classification approach, while ground-breaking and valuable to the field of criminal profiling, has not gone without criticism. It has been critiqued for its lack of empirical evidence, yet few studies have attempted to test its validity. This study examined the organized/disorganized model to determine if support exists for two discrete offender types among a sample of 350 Canadian cases of sexual homicide. Variables related to crime scene characteristics and the offender’s modus operandi were tested using K-means and latent class analyses. Results from both methods suggest that sexual murderers can be separated into two distinct profiles that share similarities with the organized/disorganized dichotomy in terms of the detection avoidance strategies, control and type of violence used by the offender. The latent class results show further support for the FBI model in relation to the offender’s approach, sexual acts, and post-mortem activities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".