Home of
the National Tactical Invitational
To view us online, visit http://www.teddytactical.com/
Monthly
Lecture: 04-2006
WEREWOLVES, VCA AND OTHER SUCH MYTHICAL CHARACTERS
I.
Practitioners have a valid interest in the thinking
processes of VCA that lead to targeting behavior.
A.
In more recent years, Trainers have included in their
curriculums, commentary on the target selection behaviors of VCA.
1. Historically,
the earliest attempts at addressing this issue were done by Gunsite TC in their
“Principles of Defense” as authored by Col. Cooper.
2. Since
that time various schools and commentators have added their own views of the
matter.
3. Some
have sought to introduce research by investigators in the social disciplines as
evidence of models used by VCA in target selection.
4. Some of
those examples have taken on mythical proportions.
5. The
result of these efforts by some Trainers to provide their students with information
by which the student can recognize targeting behavior has, at times, created
the impression that VCA have some special ability to identify those vulnerable
to attack.
B.
Predatory behavior
1. Predatory
behavior is defined as the act of plundering, robbing and/or killing for
personal enrichment, whether for instrumental gain or expression of some form.
2. Predatory
behavior is motive based.
a.
Variables of the motive, such as immediacy or investment
vs. reward will effect the predators target selection.
3. Predatory
behavior is seen in the animal world as well as the human world.
4. The
behavior patterns of the predator are similar, whether animal or human.
C.
Elements of Predatory Behavior
1. Predators
first identify locations that provide access to the objects of their predation.
2. The
location must be conducive to exploiting their attack strategy and provide a
means for the predator to sort the available candidates for attack.
a.
Crocodiles congregate at river crossing points for herds
of zebra.
b.
Human predators loiter about near stairwells of public
areas such as parking garages.
3. Predators
present themselves in a fashion that allows them to assess whether the
available candidates for targeting show indications that they recognize the
potential danger from the predator.
a.
Crocodiles lay in the shallow water at the point of
crossing, plainly visible to the herd of zebras as they cross the water.
b.
Human predators lurk in the areas of stairwells as they
sort their targets. Their presence is
plainly obvious.
c.
The issue of awareness as recognition.
4. Predators
sort the candidates for their value as targets.
a.
Crocodiles tend to look for the zebra that is weak, either
through age or infirmity.
1) The
young, the old, the sick, the timid, the injured or the “goofs” display the
attributes that render them the most likely to present a successful attack
candidate.
2) Even a
herd of zebras have “goofs”. among them.
b.
Human predators look for the same qualities in their
targets.
1) Research
shows that “recidivist victims” have such qualities.
2) “Victims”
tend to participate in a dialogue with their attackers that inform the Predator
of the targets availability for attack.
3) “Battered
women” tend to serially engage in relationships that expose them to abuse. They often are the classic example of
“recidivist victims”. Such people
engage in selection processes and dialogue behavior with their batterers that
encourage the batterer.
5. Predators
confirm their selection by making contact with the target to gage their
response to the direct contact.
Timidity, confusion, indecisiveness and/or inability to effectively
respond embolden the predator to initiate his attack and confirm in him the
correctness of his selection.
a.
Sharks “bump” before they bite. Bears make a “false charge” to decide if the object of the charge
behaves as prey.
b.
Human predators make direct contact. They use effrontery, intense eye contact,
proxemics and large arm movements to assess their targeting decision.
c.
The exigencies of the moment, numerical or tactical
advantage, or simple recklessness may cause the Predator to set aside his
preference for the weak and attack even the strongest target.
6. The
predator initiates his attack.
II.
Behavioralists Attempts to Quantify the Predators
Selection Process.
A.
Those involved in the social disciplines have tried to
craft studies to identify the behavior in people that human predators “key on”
in making victim selection.
B.
Trainers have attempted to use those studies as a means to
educate their trainees about conduct that will cause a de-selection of the
trainees in the event they encounter an operational VCA.
1. Some of
these “studies” have taken on the qualities of folklore in the training
community.
2. Some of
the suggestions by trainers, while not necessarily impractical, are not in
keeping with the actual conclusions of the researchers.
3. The
results of the researchers are very much in keeping with the “selection”
indicators of the animal world.
4. Starting
about 25 years ago, training schools began citing a study that purported to
show that VCA who had a history of attacking strangers on the street could
identify potential targets by watching videos of pedestrians as they walked
down the street.
5. The
characterization of the selections made by the VCA’s was that they could rank
targets by their susceptibility for attack by watching the way they walked down
a street.
6. Trainers
coached their trainees that they could reduce their probability of selection
through showing “awareness” as they moved about.
7. Trainees
tend to interpret the comments of Trainers to suggest that VCA have some
special capability, bordering on the super-natural, at identifying those
vulnerable to attack.
III.
The Actual Studies.
A.
We will examine two of the actual studies that gave rise
to the mythology surrounding non-verbal cues interpreted by VCA as indicators
of vulnerability to attack.
B.
“Attracting Assault: Victims’ Nonverbal Cues” by Grayson
and Stein.
1. Originally
done about 1981.
2. Operated
on the premise that people provide clues, nonverbally, in their movement
concerning their mental state and emotions.
3. Operated
on the premise that an analysis of the actor’s motion could be converted to
numerical values.
4. Over a
period of three days, more than 60 people were video-taped as they walked a
particular section of a city street.
5. They
were divided into four groups of 15 each.
Two groups were women and two groups were men. The male and female groups were divided into groups identified
and “young” and “old”.
6. 12
incarcerated VCA with known histories for violent assaults on strangers were
asked to discuss their impressions of the people on the tape in a fashion to
allow the researchers to develop a scale for evaluating an individuals “assault
potential”.
7. Comments
describing the inmates reaction to the potential for attack were selected and
assigned values from 1 to 10, with 1 being the most vulnerable to attack.
8. A second
group of 53 inmates was selected to view the tapes and rate the individuals on
the tapes using the descriptive scale created by the first group of inmates.
9. The
second set of inmates had convictions ranging from simple assault to homicide
on strangers.
10. Walkers
with a rating of 1-3 were identified as “potentially easy victims”. Walkers rated as 4-10 were classified as
“non-victims”.
11. In
general, older men and women were more often rated as easy victims for
potential assault.
12. 21
separate movements were evaluated for their influence on the inmate
evaluators. Statistically significant
differences were seen in 5 of the 21 evaluated movements.
a.
STRIDE LENGTH.
Among those rated as non-victims, all but one had a medium stride
length. Among those rated as victims
just more than half were rated as having a “medium” stride length.
b.
TYPE OF WEIGHT SHIFT.
Of the non-victims, only two did not move three-dimensionally. Of the victims, just more than half did not
move three dimensionally.
c.
BODY MOVEMENT. All
of the non-victims moved contra-laterally.
Of the victims, half moved contra-laterally. The other half moved unilaterally.
d.
TYPE OF WALK. Of
the non-victims, all but one walked posturally. Of the victims, 40% moved posturally, 40% walked gesturally and
20% walked in a non-specific fashion.
e.
FEET. Of the
non-victims, all swung their feet as they walked. Of the victims, only one swung their feet as they walked. The rest lifted their feet.
13. OVERALL
OBSERVATIONS.
a.
In evaluating victims as susceptible to attack, inmates
commented that “any dude who looked different” was a potential target. “Different” included patterns of dress that
were outside the norm.
b.
The prime difference between victims and non-victims was
the “wholeness” of their body movement.
The body flowed as one unit as it moved in non-victims. Victims showed “non-synchronous or
anti-synchronous” body movement.
14. COMMENT.
a.
No evaluation was given by the inmates to “awareness”
displayed by the target.
b.
The movement patterns that were singled out as
determinative of potential for attack were those seen in people who would be
seen as “different” either by design or by imposition occasioned by mental,
psychological or physical infirmity.
c.
Just as in the animal world, the primary targets seem to
be the young, the old, the sick, the timid, the injured or the “goofs”.
C.
Victim Selection and Kinematics: A Point-Light
Investigation of Vulnerability to Attack,
by Gunnis, Johnston and Hudson
1. Questions
not addressed by the previous study are the influence of dress by the walker
and if these “indicators” are only interpretable by VCA. This second study attempts to look at these
questions.
2. This
study was published in 2002.
3. It
attempted to control for cues given about the walker in the style of dress,
while addressing the mode of dress.
4. The
study used evaluators that were not known to be VCA.
5. An
operating premise was that observers of strangers in a room can identify the
nature of ongoing interactions among strangers by observing time limited
glimpses of their actions.
6. Flirting,
anger, dominance and timidity can be determined by an observer.
a.
These observations and conclusions are calculated each day
by people going about their ordinary affairs.
b.
There is nothing peculiar to a persons ability to make
these conclusions.
7. Researchers
used “point of light” to isolate the components of walking gate in three groups
of individuals to see if vulnerability to attack could be assigned to merely
the gate of the person observed.
8. The first
group was comprised of women. They were
filmed while wearing dark clothing fitted with “point of light” apparatus as
they walked against a dark background.
9. The
video, which only showed the reflectorized
disks attached to the principle joints of the body as the walker moved,
were shown to 7 men who were asked to use the same 10 point scale for assessing
vulnerability to attack used in the previous study.
10. After
the rating, 30 men and 30 women were asked to rate the video-taped walkers for
vulnerability to be mugged or raped.
11. The same
25 point of motion schedule as used in the previous study was used to calculate
the effect of each individual body movement.
12. The
conclusions of the researchers mirrored those of the researchers in the
previous study.
a.
Those less vulnerable to attack were typically energetic
in their walk, postural in their movements, swing their feet and moved three
dimensionally.
b.
Those more vulnerable to attack moved with less energy,
had gestural walking styles, lifted their feet, showed limited arm movement and
a slow walk.
13. The
second group was comprised of male walkers.
The same process was used to create the videos. The same process was used to develop a
rating scale.
14. Six male
and six females watched the video-tapes and evaluated the walkers for attack
vulnerability.
15. The
results were the same as seen in the group of female walkers.
a.
This finding suggests that non-VCA observers, male or
female conclude the same attack vulnerability in walkers as VCA do.
16. Group
three was comprised of females who were attired in clothing that would effect
the walking style.
a.
They were dressed in tight fitting skirts and high heeled
shoes, thus constraining their normal walking style.
17. The
results again were consistent with those who showed walking movements that were
low energy and constrained through the effect of clothing that augmented the
constraint in normal walking styles.
18. OVERALL
CONCLUSIONS.
a.
Low vulnerability to attack was associated with higher
energy, (willingness to put up a fight) and the ability to escape. They showed a youthful walk.
b.
These characteristics suggest powerfulness, physical
strength and social dominance.
c.
Because of the filming methods, raters were not responding
to obvious relative comparisons of size and weight in relation to themselves.
d.
Walking style features are independent of size and weight.
IV.
Lessons Learned
A.
Predators, whether animal or human, make their first cut
in the selection process by evaluating movement styles that suggest the
proposed target is at a disadvantage through weakness occasioned by age,
timidity, and/or physical, mental, emotional or psychological infirmity.
B.
This first cut is not necessarily determinative of an
actual assault.
C.
Additional information acquired by techniques that are
designed to confirm or refute the original impression are employed.
D.
“Awareness” is not necessarily factored by the VCA in his
first cut evaluation, but will be useful in short circuiting the confirmation
techniques.
E.
There is nothing mystical in the knowledge of the
VCA. He simply uses common information
and reasonably drawn conclusions from that information to make the initial
evaluation.