RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACEV

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Igor Pacheco, CLPE (Miami-Dade Police Department) Brian Cerchiai, CTPE (Miami-Dade Police Department) Stephanie Stoiloff, M. S. (Miami-Dade Police Department) Sneh Gulati, Ph. D. (Florida International University) Presented by: Igor Pacheco, CLPE & Brian Cerchiai, CTPE

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS This project was supported by Award No. 2010 -DN-BX-K 268 awarded by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U. S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication/program/exhibition are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Justice. 2

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Background The 2009 National Academy of Sciences’ report titled, “Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward” announced thirteen recommendations to address challenges facing the forensic science community. ◦ This study was conducted specifically to address concerns of their third recommendation, “Research is needed to address issues of accuracy, reliability, and validity in the forensic science disciplines. ” MDPD study was modeled after previous study by Glen Langengurg ◦ Langenburg, G. A Performance Study of the ACE-V Process: A Pilot Study to Measure the Accuracy, Precision, Reproducibility, Repeatability, and Biasability of Conclusions Resulting from the ACE-V process. J. For. Ident. , 2009, 59 (2). 3

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Background Evaluated the reliability of Latent Fingerprint Examiners using the Analysis, Comparison, Evaluation, and Verification (ACE-V) methodology in latent fingerprint examinations by Measured the Accuracy, Precision, Reproducibility, Repeatability, and Bias of four categorical opinions: ◦ Identification ◦ Exclusion ◦ Inconclusive ◦ No value 4

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Participation 109 Experienced Latent Print Examiners Participated ◦ Requirements to participate: 1 of active latent casework experience uses the ACE-V methodology enforcement agency (crime laboratory), or like agency, in the United States. This includes all active, retired or contracted latent examiners. 5

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Announcement & Questionnaire Participants from 75 Different Law Enforcement Agencies 53 Local Agencies

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Announcement & Questionnaire Participants from 75 Different Law Enforcement Agencies 16 State Agencies 53 Local Agencies

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Announcement & Questionnaire Participants from 75 Different Law Enforcement Agencies Federal Agencies 3 16 State Agencies 53 Local Agencies

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Announcement & Questionnaire Participants from 75 Different Law Enforcement Agencies Federal Agencies 3 16 State Agencies 4 N/A 53 Local Agencies

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Announcement & Questionnaire Latent Print Examination Experience 36% 1 – 5 yrs 10

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Announcement & Questionnaire Latent Print Examination Experience 36% 1 – 5 yrs 14% 5 – 10 yrs 11

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Announcement & Questionnaire Latent Print Examination Experience 36% 1 – 5 yrs 17% 10 – 15 yrs 14% 5 – 10 yrs 12

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Announcement & Questionnaire Latent Print Examination Experience 33% > 15 yrs 36% 1 – 5 yrs 17% 10 – 15 yrs 14% 5 – 10 yrs 13

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Announcement & Questionnaire IAI Latent Print Certification 44. 95% Not Certified 55. 05% Certified 14

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Research Questions 1) Will Latent Examiners be able to correctly identify or exclude unknown latent impressions from known standards using the ACE methodology? 2) Will Latent Examiners be able to correctly identify or exclude unknown latent impressions from known standards using the ACE-V methodology? 3) Will Latent Examiners be able to reproduce and repeat conclusions from unknown latent impressions to known standards using the ACE and ACE-V methodology? 4) Will Latent Examiners be able to reproduce and repeat conclusions from unknown latent impression to known standards using the ACE-V methodology under high bias conditions? 15

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Research Design and Method Thirteen confidential volunteer sources were identified 8 Men & 5 Women chosen due to not having their fingerprints or palmprints in any known AFIS database outside of Miami-Dade County. 13 sets of Tenprint and Palm Print Standards collected 2, 711 known latent impressions were created (fingers and palms) Collected from non-porous flat and curved surfaces (plastic, tile, metal, and glass) Processed using black powder and clear tape on white backing cards (scanned and printed as photos) The latent impressions included various sizes, clarity, and levels of distortion 16

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Research Design and Method Three (3) Certified Latent Print Examiners independently evaluated and compared 320 latent prints to the known standards using a rating scale that was created for this research. ◦ 80 Latent Prints were chosen for the final test sets Rating Scales for each latent analysis and comparison: (Analysis) Strength of Value of Latent Print + (Comparison) Latent in Agreement with Standard 2 = Difficulty of Comparison 17

Latent in Agreement with Standard Strength of Value of Latent Print Minutiae: 4. 33 Minutiae Formations: 0. 00 Clarity: 0. 67 2. 00 Total: 5. 00 6. 33 Difficulty of Comparison: 5. 67 0 Insufficient to Difficult 7 14 21 18

Strength of Value of Latent Print Minutiae: 10. 00 Latent in Agreement with Standard 6. 00 Minutiae Formations: 1. 00 0. 66 Clarity: 1. 33 2. 00 Total: 12. 33 8. 66 0 7 Difficult to Moderate 14 Difficulty of Comparison: 10. 5 21 19

Latent in Agreement with Standard 14. 00 Strength of Value of Latent Print Minutiae: 14. 00 Minutiae Formations: 3. 33 Clarity: 2. 00 19. 33 Total: Difficulty of Comparison: 19. 33 0 7 14 Moderate to Easy 21 20

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Research Design and Method Distribution of Latent Prints for Testing 30% 24 Latent Prints Source was not Present 70% 56 Latent Prints Source was Present 21

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Research Design and Method Source Not Present: Strength of Value of Latent Print (24 Latents) 25% 6 Latent Prints Insufficient to Difficult 22

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Research Design and Method Source Not Present: Strength of Value of Latent Print (24 Latents) 37. 5% 9 Latent Prints Moderate to Easy 25% 6 Latent Prints Insufficient to Difficult 23

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Research Design and Method Source Not Present: Strength of Value of Latent Print (24 Latents) 37. 5% 9 Latent Prints Moderate to Easy 25% 6 Latent Prints Insufficient to Difficult 37. 5% 9 Latent Prints Difficult to Moderate 24

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Research Design and Method • Study was conducted in 3 Phases over a one year period Phase 1 (ACE) Phase 2 (ACE) Phase 3 (ACE-V) 109 Participants 88 Participants 86 Participants 40 Latent Trials ACE-V 25 Latent Trials (Group A) 20 Latent Comparisons (Group B) 20 Latent Comparisons Repeatability 27 Latent Trials High Bias ACE-V 37 Latent Trials High Bias Repeatability 24 Latent Trials 25

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Research Design and Method • Phase 1 and 2– 80 Latent ACE Trials • For each latent trial, participants were asked to conduct an analysis, comparison and evaluation • Analysis: Rate clarity, identify anatomical source, certainty of orientation, and whether the impression was of value or of no value. • Comparison: Compare to 3 of the 10 sets of standards that were provided. • Evaluation: For each evaluation, the participants were to indicate whether they had made an identification, an exclusion, or an inconclusive decision. 26

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Research Design and Method • Phase 1 and 2– 80 Latent ACE Trials • Answer Sheets 27

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 1 and 2 ACE Trials – Analysis Value and No Value Decisions Phase 1 109 Participants Phase 2 88 Participants Total Decisions: Value 3210 1342 4452 No Value 1023 388 1411 Total Decisions: 4233 1730 5963 28

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 1 and 2 ACE Trials – Results Value and No Value Decisions (5, 963) • 2, 457 Correct Identifications • 953 Correct Exclusions • 42 Erroneous Identifications • 235 Erroneous Exclusions • 446 Inconclusives when from the same source • 403 Inconclusives when from different sources 29

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 1 and 2 ACE Trials Error Rates • False Positive Rate • Percentage of the time the participant made an erroneous identification when given the possibility of making any of the three categorical opinions (Identification, Inconclusive, and Exclusion). With Inconclusives Without Inconclusives 3. 0% 4. 2% The accuracy of ACE and ACE-V examinations are reported as an overall participant error rate after participants made a sufficiency determination that a latent was of “value” for Identification. 30

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 1 and 2 ACE Trials – Results 42 Erroneous Identifications • 35 Erroneous IDs – Appear to be Clerical Errors Made by 4 different Examiners • 19 times correct standards but opposite finger or opposite palm was chosen • 8 times correct standards and not opposite finger was chosen • 8 times incorrect standards but same finger or palm was chosen • 4 Erroneous IDs - Don’t appear to be Clerical Errors • 4 times incorrect standard and not opposite finger was chosen • 3 Erroneous IDs the source was not present • Based on 2 Latent Prints 31

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 1 and 2 ACE Trials – Results 3 Erroneous IDs the source was not present Latent Print #1 Strength of Value of Latent: 17. 00 Correctly Excluded: 31 times Erroneously Identified: 1 time Inconclusive: 8 times 32

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 1 and 2 ACE Trials – Results 3 Erroneous IDs the source was not present Latent Print #2 Strength of Value of Latent: 16. 00 Correctly Excluded: 33 times Erroneously Identified: 2 times Inconclusive: 5 times 33

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 1 and 2 ACE Trials Error Rates • False Negative Rate • Percentage of the time the participant made an erroneous exclusion when given the possibility of making any of the three categorical opinions (Identification, Inconclusive, and Exclusion) With Inconclusives Without Inconclusives 7. 5% 8. 7% 34

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 3 ACE-V Trials – Results (Verification, Bias & Repeatability) 35

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 3 ACE-V Trials – Results (Verification, Bias & Repeatability) Phase 3 was comprised of four different groups • • Group 1 – ACE-V Trials Group 2 – ACE-V Trials (High Bias) Group 3 – ACE-V Trials (Repeatability) Group 4 – ACE-V Trials (Repeatability, High Bias) 36

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 3 ACE-V Trials – Results ACE-V + Repeatability, Answer Sheet If your comparison agrees with the identification, please mark the box labeled "Agree". 37

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 3 ACE-V Trials – Results • 487 Correct Identifications (agreed with the correct identification) • 13 Correct Exclusions (disagreed with incorrect identification) • 0 Erroneous Identifications (agreed with incorrect identification) • 15 Erroneous Exclusions (disagreed with the correct identification) • 15 Inconclusives when from the same source • 2 Inconclusives when from different sources 38

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 3 ACE-V Trials Error Rates • False Positive Rate With Inconclusives Without Inconclusives 0. 0% 39

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 3 ACE-V Trials Error Rates • False Negative Rate With Inconclusives Without Inconclusives 2. 9% 3. 0% 40

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 3 ACE-V Trials – Results ACE-V + Repeatability, Answer Sheet – High Bias 41

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 3 ACE-V Trials (Biased Conditions)– Results • 178 Correct Identifications (agreed with the correct identification) • 78 Correct Exclusions (disagreed with incorrect identification) • 3 Erroneous Identifications (agreed with incorrect identification) • 15 Erroneous Exclusions (disagreed with the correct identification) • 51 Inconclusives when from the same source • 4 Inconclusives when from different sources 42

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 3 ACE-V Trials (Biased Conditions)– Results 43

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 3 ACE-V Trials – Repeatability • To determine if the participants would repeat their own conclusions from comparisons of unknown latent prints to known standards the results of identification decisions, erroneous exclusions, and inconclusive results (where the source was present) from Phase 1 were sent to the same participants in Phase 3. • 27 latent prints presented to participants for repeatability • 1, 311 participant decisions. 44

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 3 ACE-V Trials – Repeatability 45

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 3 ACE-V Trials – Repeatability 46

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 3 ACE-V Trials – Repeatability 47

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 3 ACE-V Trials – Repeatability 48

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 3 ACE-V Trials – Repeatability (Biased Conditions) • To determine if the participants would repeat their own conclusions from comparisons of unknown latent prints to known standards under biased conditions, the results of identification decisions, erroneous exclusions, and inconclusive results (where the source was present) from Phase 1 were sent to the same participants in Phase 3. • 24 latent prints presented to participants for repeatability under biased conditions • 333 participant decisions 49

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 3 ACE-V Trials – Repeatability (Biased Conditions) 50

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 3 ACE-V Trials – Repeatability (Biased Conditions) 1 participant 51

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 3 ACE-V Trials – Repeatability (Biased Conditions) 52

RESEARCH STUDY FOR THE RELIABILITY OF THE ACE-V PROCESS: ACCURACY, PRECISION, REPRODUCIBILITY, AND REPEATABILITY IN LATENT FINGERPRINT EXAMINATIONS Phase 3 ACE-V Trials – Repeatability (Biased Conditions) 53

Summary of Results ◦ 5, 963 sufficiency determinations, ◦ 4, 536 ACE decisions ◦ 532 ACE-V decisions ◦ 1, 311 repeatability decisions, ◦ 326 ACE decisions under biased conditions ◦ 333 repeatability decisions under biased conditions 54

Summary of Results ◦ For ACE decisions False Positive Rate of 3. 0% False Negative Rate of 7. 5%. ◦ For ACE-V decisions Positive Rate of 0% False Negative Rate of 2. 9%. 55

Summary of Results ◦ Repeatability 94. 6% of the time previous correct identifications repeated 93. 1% of the time, participants did not repeat their previous erroneous exclusions ◦ Repeatability Bias 73. 0% of the time previous correct identifications repeated 96. 5% of the time, participants did not repeat their previous erroneous exclusions 56

In conclusion… ◦ With respect to this study fingerprint examiners are highly accurate and reliable when conducting examinations using a process that is similar to actual casework, in which all fingerprint results are verified by a second fingerprint examiners are less likely to miss an identification the easier the latent print is to compare, and more likely to report an inconclusive decision when comparing the most difficult latent prints. examiners are more likely to miss an identification than to report an incorrect identification. This study indicated that bias may influence decision making. For example, participants who were asked to perform a second verification, in which they were given two previous conclusions, agreed less often with an initial correct identification and reported more inconclusive decisions. 57

THE END 58