Cargando…
Repeatability and Reproducibility of Decisions by Latent Fingerprint Examiners
The interpretation of forensic fingerprint evidence relies on the expertise of latent print examiners. We tested latent print examiners on the extent to which they reached consistent decisions. This study assessed intra-examiner repeatability by retesting 72 examiners on comparisons of latent and ex...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3299696/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22427888 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0032800 |
_version_ | 1782226151424393216 |
---|---|
author | Ulery, Bradford T. Hicklin, R. Austin Buscaglia, JoAnn Roberts, Maria Antonia |
author_facet | Ulery, Bradford T. Hicklin, R. Austin Buscaglia, JoAnn Roberts, Maria Antonia |
author_sort | Ulery, Bradford T. |
collection | PubMed |
description | The interpretation of forensic fingerprint evidence relies on the expertise of latent print examiners. We tested latent print examiners on the extent to which they reached consistent decisions. This study assessed intra-examiner repeatability by retesting 72 examiners on comparisons of latent and exemplar fingerprints, after an interval of approximately seven months; each examiner was reassigned 25 image pairs for comparison, out of total pool of 744 image pairs. We compare these repeatability results with reproducibility (inter-examiner) results derived from our previous study. Examiners repeated 89.1% of their individualization decisions, and 90.1% of their exclusion decisions; most of the changed decisions resulted in inconclusive decisions. Repeatability of comparison decisions (individualization, exclusion, inconclusive) was 90.0% for mated pairs, and 85.9% for nonmated pairs. Repeatability and reproducibility were notably lower for comparisons assessed by the examiners as “difficult” than for “easy” or “moderate” comparisons, indicating that examiners' assessments of difficulty may be useful for quality assurance. No false positive errors were repeated (n = 4); 30% of false negative errors were repeated. One percent of latent value decisions were completely reversed (no value even for exclusion vs. of value for individualization). Most of the inter- and intra-examiner variability concerned whether the examiners considered the information available to be sufficient to reach a conclusion; this variability was concentrated on specific image pairs such that repeatability and reproducibility were very high on some comparisons and very low on others. Much of the variability appears to be due to making categorical decisions in borderline cases. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3299696 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2012 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-32996962012-03-16 Repeatability and Reproducibility of Decisions by Latent Fingerprint Examiners Ulery, Bradford T. Hicklin, R. Austin Buscaglia, JoAnn Roberts, Maria Antonia PLoS One Research Article The interpretation of forensic fingerprint evidence relies on the expertise of latent print examiners. We tested latent print examiners on the extent to which they reached consistent decisions. This study assessed intra-examiner repeatability by retesting 72 examiners on comparisons of latent and exemplar fingerprints, after an interval of approximately seven months; each examiner was reassigned 25 image pairs for comparison, out of total pool of 744 image pairs. We compare these repeatability results with reproducibility (inter-examiner) results derived from our previous study. Examiners repeated 89.1% of their individualization decisions, and 90.1% of their exclusion decisions; most of the changed decisions resulted in inconclusive decisions. Repeatability of comparison decisions (individualization, exclusion, inconclusive) was 90.0% for mated pairs, and 85.9% for nonmated pairs. Repeatability and reproducibility were notably lower for comparisons assessed by the examiners as “difficult” than for “easy” or “moderate” comparisons, indicating that examiners' assessments of difficulty may be useful for quality assurance. No false positive errors were repeated (n = 4); 30% of false negative errors were repeated. One percent of latent value decisions were completely reversed (no value even for exclusion vs. of value for individualization). Most of the inter- and intra-examiner variability concerned whether the examiners considered the information available to be sufficient to reach a conclusion; this variability was concentrated on specific image pairs such that repeatability and reproducibility were very high on some comparisons and very low on others. Much of the variability appears to be due to making categorical decisions in borderline cases. Public Library of Science 2012-03-12 /pmc/articles/PMC3299696/ /pubmed/22427888 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0032800 Text en This is an open-access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Public Domain declaration, which stipulates that, once placed in the public domain, this work may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Ulery, Bradford T. Hicklin, R. Austin Buscaglia, JoAnn Roberts, Maria Antonia Repeatability and Reproducibility of Decisions by Latent Fingerprint Examiners |
title | Repeatability and Reproducibility of Decisions by Latent Fingerprint Examiners |
title_full | Repeatability and Reproducibility of Decisions by Latent Fingerprint Examiners |
title_fullStr | Repeatability and Reproducibility of Decisions by Latent Fingerprint Examiners |
title_full_unstemmed | Repeatability and Reproducibility of Decisions by Latent Fingerprint Examiners |
title_short | Repeatability and Reproducibility of Decisions by Latent Fingerprint Examiners |
title_sort | repeatability and reproducibility of decisions by latent fingerprint examiners |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3299696/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22427888 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0032800 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ulerybradfordt repeatabilityandreproducibilityofdecisionsbylatentfingerprintexaminers AT hicklinraustin repeatabilityandreproducibilityofdecisionsbylatentfingerprintexaminers AT buscagliajoann repeatabilityandreproducibilityofdecisionsbylatentfingerprintexaminers AT robertsmariaantonia repeatabilityandreproducibilityofdecisionsbylatentfingerprintexaminers |