Latent print examinations involve a complex set of psychological and cognitive processes. This article summarizes existing work that has addressed how training and experience creates changes in latent print examiners. Experience appears to improve overall accuracy, increase visual working memory, and lead to configural processing of upright fingerprints. Experts also demonstrate a narrower visual filter and, as a group, tend to show greater consistency when viewing ink prints. These findings address recent criticisms of latent print evidence, but many open questions still exist. Cognitive scientists are well positioned to conduct studies that will improve the training and practices of latent print examiners, and suggestions for becoming involved in fingerprint research are provided.
Busey, T. [A.], Schneider, B., & Wyatte, D. (2008, May). Expertise and the width of the visual filter in fingerprint examiners. Poster presented at the 8th Annual Meeting of the Vision Sciences Society, Naples, FL.
Busey, T. A., & Vanderkolk, J. R. (2005). Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence for configural processing in fingerprint experts. Vision Research, 45, 431–448.
Busey, T. A., Yu, C., Wyatte, D., Vanderkolk, J., Parada, F. J., & Akvipat, R. (2010). Consistency and variability among latent print examiners as revealed by eye tracking methodologies. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Cohen, A. L., Shiffrin, R. M., Gold, J. M., Ross, D. A., & Ross, M. G. (2007). Inducing features from visual noise. Journal of Vision, 7(8, Art. 15), 1–14.
Cole, S. A. (2005). More than zero: Accounting for error in latent fingerprint identification. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 95, 985–1078.
Dosher, B. A., & Lu, Z.-L. (2005). Perceptual learning in clear displays optimizes perceptual expertise: Learning the limiting process. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102, 5286–5290.
Dror, I. E., & Cole, S. A. (2010). The vision in “blind” justice: Expert perception, judgment, and visual cognition in forensic pattern recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 161–167.
Eimer, M. (2000). Effects of face inversion on the structural encoding and recognition of faces: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Cognitive Brain Research, 10, 145–158.
Epstein, R. (2002). Fingerprints meet Daubert: The myth of fingerprint “science” is revealed. Southern California Law Review, 75, 605–657.
Goldstone, R. L. (2000). Unitization during category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 26, 86–112.
Jain, A. K., Prabhakar, S., & Pankanti, S. (2002). On the similarity of identical twin fingerprints. Pattern Recognition, 35, 2653–2663.
Krupinski, E. A. (1996). Visual scanning patterns of radiologists searching mammograms. Academic Radiology, 3, 137–144.
National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences (2009). Strengthening forensic science in the United States: A path forward. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
Neumann, C., Champod, C., Puch-Solis, R., Egli, N., Anthonioz, A., & Bromage-Griffiths, A. (2007). Computation of likelihood ratios in fingerprint identification for configurations of any number of minutiae. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 52, 54–64.
Ratha, N. K., Connell, J. H., & Bolle, R. M. (2001). An analysis of minutiae matching strength. In J. Bigun & F. Smeraldi (Eds.), Audioand video-based biometric person authentication (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2091, pp. 223–228). Berlin: Springer.
Reneau, R. D. (2003). Unusual latent print examinations. Journal of Forensic Identification, 53, 531–537.
Rossion, B., Gauthier, I., Tarr, M. J., Despland, P., Bruyer, R., Linotte, S., & Crommelinck, M. (2000). The N170 occipito-temporal component is delayed and enhanced to inverted faces but not to inverted objects: An electrophysiological account of face-specific processes in the human brain. NeuroReport, 11, 69–74.
Schyns, P. G., & Rodet, L. (1997). Categorization creates functional features. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 23, 681–696.
Su, C., & Srihari, S. N. (2008, December). Generative models for fingerprint individuality using ridge models. Paper presented at the International Conference on Pattern Recognition, Tampa, FL.
SWGFAST (2003). Standards for conclusions. Available at www.swgfast.org.
Vanderkolk, J. R. (2009). Forensic comparative science: Qualitative, quantitative source determination of unique impressions, images, and objects. Burlington, MA: Elsevier.
Vokey, J. R., Tangen, J. M., & Cole, S. A. (2009). On the preliminary psychophysics of fingerprint identification. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1023–1040.
Wertheim, K., Langenburg, G., & Moenssens, A. (2006). Report of latent print examiner accuracy during comparison training exercises. Journal of Forensic Identification, 56, 55–127.
Zabell, S. (2005). Fingerprint evidence. Journal of Law & Policy, 13, 143–179.
This research was supported by NIJ Grants 2005-MU-BX-K076 and 2009-DN-BX-K226 to the first author.
About this article
Cite this article
Busey, T.A., Parada, F.J. The nature of expertise in fingerprint examiners. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 17, 155–160 (2010). https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.17.2.155