Examiner consistency in perceptions of fingerprint minutia rarity

Friction ridge examiners (FREs) identify distinctive features (minutiae) in fingerprints and consider how rare these observed minutiae are in their decisions about both the value of a fingerprint and whether there is enough correspondence between two fingerprints to support an "identification" or "exclusion" decision. But subjective perceptions about the frequency of events and features tend to be inconsistent and dynamic, which means that variable perceptions of minutia frequency may contribute to inconsistencies in FREs' opinions about fingerprint evidence. We surveyed expert FREs at two time points (N<sub>Time 1</sub> = 132; N<sub>Time 2</sub> = 99) to establish how rare FREs believe different minutia types to be and to determine the variation in examiners' perceptions-both between different examiners and across time for the same examiner. We observed significantly less variation in FREs' perceptions of minutia frequency for three minutiae: the two most common minutiae and the minutia perceived to be the least common. We also observed increases in FREs' estimates of minutia frequency over time and when they reported recent sightings of the rarest minutiae. FREs reported frequently using this information in their fingerprint comparison decisions. We present practical recommendations for using these consensus-based frequency estimates (until more objective data are available) to increase consistency in FREs' use of base rates when examining fingerprint evidence, which may consequently increase the repeatability and reproducibility of decisions made by FREs.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Forensic Science International
Published
2024-10-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2024.112244
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Biometric Identification and Security
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.35

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Examiner consistency in perceptions of fingerprint minutia rarity

Brett O. Gardner, Adele Quigley‐McBride, Heidi Eldridge
1 citations
Forensic Science International
Biometric Identification and Security
0.35
article

Examiner consistency in perceptions of fingerprint minutia rarity

Brett O. Gardner, Adele Quigley‐McBride, Heidi Eldridge
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Friction ridge examiners (FREs) identify distinctive features (minutiae) in fingerprints and consider how rare these observed minutiae are in their decisions about both the value of a fingerprint and whether there is enough correspondence between two fingerprints to support an "identification" or "exclusion" decision. But subjective perceptions about the frequency of events and features tend to be inconsistent and dynamic, which means that variable perceptions of minutia frequency may contribute to inconsistencies in FREs' opinions about fingerprint evidence. We surveyed expert FREs at two time points (N<sub>Time 1</sub> = 132; N<sub>Time 2</sub> = 99) to establish how rare FREs believe different minutia types to be and to determine the variation in examiners' perceptions-both between different examiners and across time for the same examiner. We observed significantly less variation in FREs' perceptions of minutia frequency for three minutiae: the two most common minutiae and the minutia perceived to be the least common. We also observed increases in FREs' estimates of minutia frequency over time and when they reported recent sightings of the rarest minutiae. FREs reported frequently using this information in their fingerprint comparison decisions. We present practical recommendations for using these consensus-based frequency estimates (until more objective data are available) to increase consistency in FREs' use of base rates when examining fingerprint evidence, which may consequently increase the repeatability and reproducibility of decisions made by FREs.

Forensic Science InternationalVol. 364
Simon Fraser University (CA), George Washington University (US), University of Virginia (US)
Duke University, University of Pennsylvania, Carnegie Mellon University, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, University of Virginia, Iowa State University, West Virginia University, Swarthmore College, National Institute of Standards and Technology, University of California, Irvine, Center for Statistics and Applications in Forensic Evidence
Openalex Percentile: Top 43%
Biometric Identification and Security
0.35
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.