Do professional facial image comparison training courses work?

Abstract

Facial image comparison practitioners compare images of unfamiliar faces and decide whether or not they show the same person. Given the importance of these decisions for national security and criminal investigations, practitioners attend training courses to improve their face identification ability. However, these courses have not been empirically validated so it is unknown if they improve accuracy. Here, we review the content of eleven professional training courses offered to staff at national security, police, intelligence, passport issuance, immigration and border control agencies around the world. All reviewed courses include basic training in facial anatomy and prescribe facial feature (or ‘morphological’) comparison. Next, we evaluate the effectiveness of four representative courses by comparing face identification accuracy before and after training in novices ( n = 152) and practitioners ( n = 236). We find very strong evidence that short (1-hour and half-day) professional training courses do not improve identification accuracy, despite 93% of trainees believing their performance had improved. We find some evidence of improvement in a 3-day training course designed to introduce trainees to the unique feature-by-feature comparison strategy used by facial examiners in forensic settings. However, observed improvements are small, inconsistent across tests, and training did not produce the qualitative changes associated with examiners’ expertise. Future research should test the benefits of longer examination-focussed training courses and incorporate longitudinal approaches to track improvements caused by mentoring and deliberate practice. In the absence of evidence that training is effective, we advise agencies to explore alternative evidence-based strategies for improving the accuracy of face identification decisions.

You shall not pass: how facial variability and feedback affect the detection of low-prevalence fake IDs

“…Although decision feedback is relatively rare compared to the vast majority of decisions that receive no additional scrutiny, it remains important to explore as a straightforward and plausible intervention strategy aimed at affecting criterion shifting. Further, professional identity screeners very typically receive feedback during their initial training period (Towler et al, 2019). Predictions about feedback are mixed, with some evidence suggesting its use as effective (Alenezi, Bindemann, Fysh, & Johnston, 2015; and others suggesting its use as ineffective or even detrimental (Papesh et al, 2018;Wolfe et al, 2007).…”

“…Regarding further application, much of the extant research involving human facial-verification screeners has focused on ways of improving their recruitment and training in professional settings. As mentioned in the introduction to Experiment 2, the benefits of feedback in long-term training is generally taken as a given, with all major training regimens implementing post-decision feedback in some way (Towler et al, 2019). It is worth noting, however, that some of these regimens have been developed and are implemented without a systematic empirical basis.…”

Consolidation, wider reflection, and policy: Response to ‘Super‐recognisers: From the lab to the world and back again’

“…The key issues outlined by Ramon et al (2019) also reflect professional practice more generally, beyond deployment of SRs. For example, there still exists limited standardization across countries in facial image comparison training, and short training courses do not lead to improvements in identification accuracy, suggesting limited scientific testing during their development (Towler et al, 2019). Similarly, the extent to which personnel selection for security roles such as passport officers is based on scientifically validated tests of face identification is typically opaque.…”

Examples improve facial identity comparison.

“…Training observers to classify face shapes, for example, does not improve face-matching accuracy (Towler, White, & Kemp, 2014). Similarly, training courses provided for professionals in real-world security settings appeared to be limited in effectiveness (Towler, Kemp, Burton, Dunn, Wayne, Moreton, & White, 2019). One method that appears to improve face matching, however, is feedback for whether a correct decision has been made.…”