Abstract
Three studies are presented which provide a mixed methods exploration of fingerprint analysis. Using a qualitative approach (Expt 1), expert analysts used a ⿿think aloud⿿ task to describe their process of analysis. Thematic analysis indicated consistency of practice, and experts⿿ comments underpinned the development of a training tool for subsequent use. Following this, a quantitative approach (Expt 2) assessed expert reliability on a fingerprint matching task. The results suggested that performance was high and often at ceiling, regardless of the length of experience held by the expert. As a final test, the experts⿿ fingerprint analysis method was taught to a set of naïve students, and their performance on the fingerprint matching task was compared both to the expert group and to an untrained novice group (Expt 3). Results confirmed that the trained students performed significantly better than the untrained students. However, performance remained substantially below that of the experts. Several explanations are explored to account for the performance gap between experts and trained novices, and their implications are discussed in terms of the future of fingerprint evidence in court.
Highlights
The fingerprint characteristics described the details of a fingerprint that the experts looked for, and these were described by 4 sub-themes
Of interest here was whether performance varied across the fingerprint pattern types, and whether performance was associated with the experience of the fingerprint expert
The trained group still performed significantly worse than the expert group (t(33.53) = 18.1, p < .001) indicating a performance gap between the experts and those students trained in the ACE-V method
Summary
Traders in early China used their fingerprints in clay seals, or on silk or paper to legitimise documents or loans, and by C13th, Eastern doctors noted the use of fingerprints to identify people. It was not until Sir Francis Galton published his classification of fingerprint patterns that they began to attract attention in the forensic community [1]. Resting on the principles of persistence and individuality [2], fingerprint matching has been relied upon in court since 1892. Today, fingerprint evidence is coming under considerable scrutiny, and questions are being raised about its admissibility in court [3]. The purpose of the present paper is to examine the practice of fingerprint analysis, as described by qualified fingerprint experts, and to determine whether that practice is both reliable and sufficient in supporting accurate performance
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
