Accuracy and reliability of forensic latent fingerprint decisions
Top Cited Papers
- 25 April 2011
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Vol. 108 (19), 7733-7738
- https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1018707108
Abstract
The interpretation of forensic fingerprint evidence relies on the expertise of latent print examiners. The National Research Council of the National Academies and the legal and forensic sciences communities have called for research to measure the accuracy and reliability of latent print examiners' decisions, a challenging and complex problem in need of systematic analysis. Our research is focused on the development of empirical approaches to studying this problem. Here, we report on the first large-scale study of the accuracy and reliability of latent print examiners' decisions, in which 169 latent print examiners each compared approximately 100 pairs of latent and exemplar fingerprints from a pool of 744 pairs. The fingerprints were selected to include a range of attributes and quality encountered in forensic casework, and to be comparable to searches of an automated fingerprint identification system containing more than 58 million subjects. This study evaluated examiners on key decision points in the fingerprint examination process; procedures used operationally include additional safeguards designed to minimize errors. Five examiners made false positive errors for an overall false positive rate of 0.1%. Eighty-five percent of examiners made at least one false negative error for an overall false negative rate of 7.5%. Independent examination of the same comparisons by different participants (analogous to blind verification) was found to detect all false positive errors and the majority of false negative errors in this study. Examiners frequently differed on whether fingerprints were suitable for reaching a conclusion.Keywords
This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- A Perspective on Errors, Bias, and Interpretation in the Forensic Sciences and Direction for Continuing Advancement*Journal of Forensic Sciences, 2009
- Testing for Potential Contextual Bias Effects During the Verification Stage of the ACE‐V Methodology when Conducting Fingerprint Comparisons*Journal of Forensic Sciences, 2009
- Of Black Boxes, Instruments, and Experts: Testing the Validity of Forensic ScienceEpisteme, 2008
- Scientific validation of fingerprint evidence under DaubertLaw, Probability and Risk, 2007
- The validity of latent fingerprint identification: confessions of a fingerprinting moderateLaw, Probability and Risk, 2007
- Enantioselective, NHC-Catalyzed Cyclopentene-Forming AnnulationsSynfacts, 2007
- Computation of Likelihood Ratios in Fingerprint Identification for Configurations of Any Number of MinutiæJournal of Forensic Sciences, 2006
- Is Fingerprint Identification Valid? Rhetorics of Reliability in Fingerprint Proponents’ DiscourseLaw & Policy, 2005
- The Coming Paradigm Shift in Forensic Identification ScienceScience, 2005
- Acknowledgment of Ad Hoc Reviewers 1999Assessment, 1999