Understanding expertise and non-analytic cognition in fingerprint discriminations made by humans

Thompson, Matthew B.; Tangen, Jason M.; Searston, Rachel A.

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00737

Cited by 13 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Different to some authors who assume that in some specific domains in the form of primary expertise, such as chess, applied diagnosis to intensive care, mathematics, etc., the discrimination on analytical thinking is fast and intuitive (Campitelli et al 2015, Thompson et al 2014. A meta-analysis based on 88 published and unpublished studies by Macnamara et al (2014) until March 2014, plus 111 independent samples with a grand total of 11.135 participants, showed positive correlations between deliberate practices and effective performance achieved in domains such as music, games, sports, education and professions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Applications of Psychological First Aid in Disaster and Emergency Situations: Its Relationship with Decision-Making

Azzollini¹,

Depaula²,

Cosentino³

et al. 2018

AJSS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Applications of Psychological First Aid in Disaster and Emergency Situations: Its Relationship with Decision-Making

Azzollini¹,

Depaula²,

Cosentino³

et al. 2018

AJSS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In the case of fingerprint comparison, examiners face the difficult task of comparing two unfamiliar and always different impressions side-by-side, and determining whether they were left by the same finger or two different fingers [29]. It is tempting to think that comparing such unfamiliar images involves an explicit and deliberative perceptual process, detached from memory or prior experience.…”

Section: We Do Not Experience the World As It Really Ismentioning

confidence: 99%

Thinking forensics: Cognitive science for forensic practitioners

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human factors and their implications for forensic science have attracted increasing levels of interest across criminal justice communities in recent years. Initial interest centred on cognitive biases, but has since expanded such that knowledge from psychology and cognitive science is slowly infiltrating forensic practices more broadly. This article highlights a series of important findings and insights of relevance to forensic practitioners. These include research on human perception, memory, context information, expertise, decision-making, communication, experience, verification, confidence, and feedback. The aim of this article is to sensitise forensic practitioners (and lawyers and judges) to a range of potentially significant issues, and encourage them to engage with research in these domains so that they may adapt procedures to improve performance, mitigate risks and reduce errors. Doing so will reduce the divide between forensic practitioners and research scientists as well as improve the value and utility of forensic science evidence.

show abstract

“…Contrary to popular television crime shows, fingerprint examinationthe process of matching or comparing a crime scene fingerprint ("latent") to a suspect fingerprint and deciding if they belong to the same finger or notis carried out by a human examiner, not a computer algorithm. With their years of experience, these examiners have become highly familiar with the features of fingerprints that are most regular across impressions of the same finger and most informative for the task of distinguishing people (Searston & Tangen, 2017b;Thompson, Tangen, & Searston, 2014). Like other domains, expertise in fingerprint comparison likely depends on perceptual learning processes that lead to the discovery of important features and their relations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An expert–novice comparison of feature choice

Robson

Searston

Edmond

et al. 2020

Applied Cognitive Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Perceptual experts have learned to rapidly and accurately perceive the structural regularities that define categories and identities within a domain. They extract important features and their relations more efficiently than novices. We used fingerprint examination to investigate expert-novice differences in feature choice. On each fingerprint within our set, experts and novices selected one feature they thought was most useful for distinguishing a particular print and one feature they thought was least useful. We found that experts and novices often differed in the features they chose, and experts tended to agree more with each other. However, any such expert-novice difference appeared to depend on the image at hand, typically emerging when salient or more conspicuous features of a fingerprint were unclear. We suggest that perceptual training ought to direct attention to useful features with the understanding that what is useful may change depending on the clarity of the stimuli.

show abstract

Understanding expertise and non-analytic cognition in fingerprint discriminations made by humans

Cited by 13 publications

References 26 publications

Applications of Psychological First Aid in Disaster and Emergency Situations: Its Relationship with Decision-Making

Applications of Psychological First Aid in Disaster and Emergency Situations: Its Relationship with Decision-Making

Thinking forensics: Cognitive science for forensic practitioners

An expert–novice comparison of feature choice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About