Discrepancies in expert decision-making in forensic fingerprint examination

Mustonen, Virpi; Hakkarainen, Kai; Tuunainen, Juha; Pohjola, Pasi

doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2015.07.031

Cited by 15 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If verification is requested only for identification conclusions, the verifier already knows the analyst's opinion. For a system in which independence is maintained, see Mustonen et al (2015).…”

Section: What Fingerprint Analysts Domentioning

confidence: 99%

“…See also Ericsson andSimon (1980, 1993). The closest work of this type I have found related to fingerprint analysis is a paper by Mustonen et al (2015) in which they report excerpts from the statements of fingerprint analysts who made different conclusions from the same fingerprint comparisons. There are also some annotated comparisons in Neumann et al (2013).…”

Section: Afis (Automatic Fingerprint Identification System)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Fingerprint science

Kadane¹

2018

Ann. Appl. Stat.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines the extent to which data support the source attributions made by fingerprint examiners. It challenges the assumption that each person's fingerprints are unique, but finds that evidence of persistence of an individual's fingerprints is better founded. The use of the AFIS (Automatic Fingerprint Identification System) is problematic, because the algorithms used are proprietary. Additionally, the databases used in conjunction with AFIS are incomplete and not public. Finally, and most crucially, the finding of similarities between the mark found at a crime scene and a fingerprint on file does not permit estimation of the number of persons in a given population who share those characteristics. Consequently, there is no scientific basis for a source attribution; whether phrased as a "match," as "individualization" or otherwise.

show abstract

Section: What Fingerprint Analysts Domentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Afis (Automatic Fingerprint Identification System)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Fingerprint science

Kadane¹

2018

Ann. Appl. Stat.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mustonen [21] reported that fingerprint examiners always face the challenges of analyzing and identifying latent fingerprints and often end up with different interpretations. According to [22], factors contributing the misidentification and misinterpretation of latent fingerprints include inadequate training, extraneous knowledge about the suspects in the case or other matters, poor judgment, health problems, limitations of vision, complex technology, stress, lack of standards or quality control, poor management, insufficient resources, and substandard working conditions.…”

Section: B Central Pocket Loop Whorl Vs Loopmentioning

confidence: 99%

Some challenges in forensic fingerprint classification and interpretation

Gao

Pinto

2016

2016 IEEE Long Island Systems, Applications and Technology Conference (LISAT)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The usage of fingerprints is no longer limited to crime investigation. And automated fingerprint identification systems have been developed for a variety of applications. However, in law enforcement agency manual categorization and analysis are still an indispensible part of fingerprint operation mainly for the following two reasons: (1) Automated fingerprint classification and identification systems are far from perfection. They can help to expedite the identification process, but cannot completely replace human fingerprint experts in terms of identification accuracy; (2) Fingerprint classification can help speed up the automated searching process as fingerprint databases become overwhelmingly large. In this paper, we review existing classification systems, including Henry, Vucetich, Battley, and NCIC classification systems, and look into the challenges of classifying certain ambiguous fingerprints and interpreting latent prints. By reviewing literature and a representative case of fingerprint misidentification, we analyze the objective and subjective factors contributing to erroneous and inconsistent identification.

show abstract

“…One of these unique stress factors is the intensified scrutiny of forensic techniques and criticisms of their validity, as well as working within an adversarial legal system (e.g., [12]). Moreover, there are often unreasonable expectations placed on the forensic examiners not to ever make any mistakes (13,14). In addition, forensic examiners can be directly exposed to emotionally distressing elements from crime scenes or disturbing case details (9,11).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1). For example, forensic examiners communicate with top management and/ or immediate supervisors (14,28), with police investigators (29)(30)(31), and they can be in contact with legal advocates during the preparation of evidence for presentation in court (32,33).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Organizational and Human Factors Affecting Forensic Decision‐Making: Workplace Stress and Feedback

Almazrouei

Dror

Morgan

2020

Journal of Forensic Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although forensic examiners operate in a stressful environment, there is a lack of understanding about workplace stress and feedback. These organizational and human factors can potentially impact forensic science judgments. In this study, 150 practicing forensic examiners from one laboratory were surveyed about their experiences of workplace stress, and the explicit and implicit feedback they receive. Forensic examiners reported that their high stress levels originated more from workplace-related factors (management and/or supervision, backlogs, and the pressure to do many cases) than from personal related factors (family, medical, and/or financial). The findings showed that a few (8%) of the forensic examiners sometimes felt strong implicit feedback about what conclusions were expected from them and that some (14%) also strongly felt that they were more appreciated when they helped to solve a case (e.g., by reaching a "match" as opposed to an "inconclusive" conclusion). Differences were found when comparing workplace stress and feedback levels across three core forensic science fields (forensic biology, chemistry, and latent prints) and across career stages (early, mid, and late). Gaining insights into the stress factors within a workplace and explicit and implicit feedback has implications for developing policies to improve the well-being, motivation, and performance of forensic examiners.

show abstract

Discrepancies in expert decision-making in forensic fingerprint examination

Cited by 15 publications

References 22 publications

Fingerprint science

Fingerprint science

Some challenges in forensic fingerprint classification and interpretation

Organizational and Human Factors Affecting Forensic Decision‐Making: Workplace Stress and Feedback

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About