What did Torres et al. (2006) conclude about criminal profiling?

• A. A majority did not view it as scientifically reliable or valid, though some saw it as potentially useful.
• B. It is illegal to use profiling in investigations.
• C. It can replace all other investigative methods.
• D. It is universally accepted as scientifically proven.

Answer: (A)

Criminal profiling is evaluated for its scientific credibility in terms of reliability and validity. Torres et al. (2006) found that most professionals did not view profiling as scientifically reliable or valid, even though many saw some potential usefulness as a tool to aid investigations, generate leads, or form hypotheses. This reflects a cautious stance: profiling may help in certain circumstances, but there isn’t enough rigorous, generalizable evidence of consistent accuracy across cases. The other statements don’t fit: profiling isn’t illegal by default, it can’t replace all investigative methods, and it isn’t universally accepted as scientifically proven.