Document Type

Article

Publication Version

Accepted Manuscript

Publication Date

4-23-2018

Journal or Book Title

Journal of Forensic Sciences

Volume

63

Issue

6

First Page

1712

Last Page

1717

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.13797

Abstract

Fingerprint examiners traditionally express conclusions in categorical terms, opining that impressions do or do not originate from the same source. Recently, probabilistic conclusions have been proposed, with examiners estimating the probability of a match between recovered and known prints. This study presented a nationally representative sample of jury‐eligible adults with a hypothetical robbery case in which an examiner opined on the likelihood that a defendant's fingerprints matched latent fingerprints in categorical or probabilistic terms. We studied model language developed by the U.S. Defense Forensic Science Center to summarize results of statistical analysis of the similarity between prints. Participant ratings of the likelihood the defendant left prints at the crime scene and committed the crime were similar when exposed to categorical and strong probabilistic match evidence. Participants reduced these likelihoods when exposed to the weaker probabilistic evidence, but did not otherwise discriminate among the prints assigned different match probabilities.

Comments

This is a manuscript of an article published as Garrett, Brandon, Gregory Mitchell, and Nicholas Scurich. "Comparing Categorical and Probabilistic Fingerprint Evidence." Journal of forensic sciences 63, no. 6 (2018): 1712-1717. Posted with permission of CSAFE.

Copyright Owner

American Academy of Forensic Sciences

Language

en

File Format

application/pdf

Published Version

Share

COinS