Perception and detection of counterfeit currency in Canada: note quality, training, and security features

Abstract

Commissioned by the Bank of Canada to help improve the detection of counterfeit currency, we designed a series of tests of performance to explore the contributions of note quality, sensory modality, training, security features and demographic variables to the accuracy of counterfeit detection with three different note types. In each test, participants (general public, and cash handlers, divided amongst commercial cash handlers and bank tellers) were presented with notes, one at a time, for up to seven seconds, and were asked to judge whether each note was genuine or counterfeit. With whole note inspection, overall accuracy was about 80%. When the security features were tested individually, the Optical Security Device (OSD) was the best feature, the hidden number was the worst, and the portrait, maple leaves, fluorescence, and microprinting were intermediate. Accuracy was higher with notes that could be seen but not touched than vice versa. Cash handlers were 74% correct with touch alone and adding touch to vision significantly improved counterfeit detection. This paper will demonstrate how performance differences between the different note types can be explained in terms of the efficacy of the individual security features incorporated into the notes.

Does Banknote Quality Affect Counterfeit Detection? Experimental Evidence from Germany and the Netherlands

“…However, we are not aware of any research that provides evidence in support of the assumption that more counterfeits are detected when the quality of banknotes in circulation is high. To our knowledge, the only study touching on this issue was performed by the Dalhousie University and commissioned by the Bank of Canada (Klein et al, 2004). In this research, no evidence is found that quality of circulation has an impact on the detection rate of counterfeits, while the performance of detecting low quality genuine notes proves less accurate in a high quality notes context (more false alarms).…”

“…The results of Jonker et al (2006) show that, overall, the Dutch public is quite capable of recognising a counterfeit note: without having practised or received any feedback, members of the general public correctly identify 83% of the counterfeit notes they have been given to examine. Klein et al (2004) find that Canadian consumers detect 69% of counterfeits they examine in a test. Detection rates of genuine banknotes are also very high.…”

“…While Jonker et al (2006) completely disregard note quality, Klein et al (2004) look at both the quality of the individual note and the quality of the surrounding notes in the test sets that their participants examine. For individual notes, they find that counterfeits are best detected when their quality is high, while genuine banknotes of medium quality produce the lowest number of false alarms.…”

Does Banknote Quality Affect Counterfeit Detection? Experimental Evidence from Germany and the Netherlands

“…They use test sets with three stacks, each consisting of 72 banknotes, and find that consumers (cashiers) are able to increase their detection rates from 83% (96%) in the first stack to 93% (99%) in the third stack. 13 Klein et al (2004) also find significant learning effects in a banknote detection test in Canada. Unfortunately, they do not distinguish between hits and false alarms.…”

“…The results of Jonker et al (2006) show that, overall, the Dutch public is quite capable of recognising a counterfeit note: without having practised or received any feedback, members of the general public correctly identify 83% of the counterfeit notes they have been given to examine. Klein et al (2004) find that Canadian consumers detect 69% of counterfeits they examine in a test. 3 Detection rates of genuine banknotes are also very high.…”