Carrie Trojan, C. Gabrielle Salfati and Kimberley Schanz
The purpose of this paper is to examine how the term “overkill” is used in the homicide literature to identify definitional issues that may interfere with reliable data coding…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to examine how the term “overkill” is used in the homicide literature to identify definitional issues that may interfere with reliable data coding across studies. This preliminary examination of the concept can guide future studies seeking to develop a standard definition.
Design/methodology/approach
To identify issues inherent in the term “overkill,” three definitions – ranging from broad and unclear to more specific and objective – were extracted or adapted from the existing literature. Using closed, homicide case files, nine coders were tasked with coding for the presence of overkill according to one of the definitions across two rounds of coding. Definitional components that made the coding of overkill difficult were identified using a qualitative sorting task to separate items into themes that represented similar issues; basic inter-rater agreement patterns were examined using pairwise percent agreement.
Findings
Based on coder feedback, two problems were identified: conceptual issues with the definitions and logistical issues with coding. However, feedback also suggested that increasing the objectivity of the overkill definition led coders to feel the intended meaning of the term was lost. Two out of three groups showed an increase in coder agreement between the two phases of data collection, illustrating how increased training is useful in certain situations.
Originality/value
This study is the first in-depth methodological and empirical examination of how the term “overkill” has been operationalized in the literature, raises key questions that may help with more clearly coding this variable, and outlines issues that may add difficulty to the development of a standard definition.
Details
Keywords
Carrie Trojan and Gabrielle Salfati
The purpose of this paper is to determine how offenses co-occur in the backgrounds of homicide offenders and if identified groups of offenses reflect an underlying theoretical…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to determine how offenses co-occur in the backgrounds of homicide offenders and if identified groups of offenses reflect an underlying theoretical construct or theme; and to determine if offenders specialize in thematically similar offenses.
Design/methodology/approach
The previous convictions of 122 single-victim homicide offenders were examined using smallest space analysis to identify groups of co-occurring offenses across offenders’ criminal histories.
Findings
The results showed a thematic distinction between violent vs instrumental offenses and 84 percent of offenders specialized in offenses within a single dominant theme, suggesting that the framework can differentiate the majority of offenders’ criminal backgrounds. Possible sub-themes were identified that could suggest further demarcation of the themes and provide a more refined framework that may be of even greater utility in differentiating offenders.
Research limitations/implications
This study utilized data from a single American city that may affect generalizability of the findings. The exclusion of a timeline for prior offending precludes consideration of offending escalation.
Originality/value
The current study uses an alternative approach to conceptualize specialization according to how offenses co-occur in the backgrounds of homicide offenders. This approach is less restrictive than considering the offenses in isolation to one another and may be of greater utility in empirically derived offender profiling models. The thematic framework developed herein can act as a foundation for future studies.