Consistency and Variability Among Latent Print Examiners as Revealed by Eye Tracking Methodologies

We recorded the eye positions of 18 expert latent print examiners and 18 novice participants across two separate experiments that were designed to represent abbreviated latent print examinations. In the first experiment, participants completed self-paced latent and inked comparisons presented on a computer monitor while their eyes were tracked with a commercial eye tracker. The similarity of eye fixation patterns was computed for each group of subjects. We found greater variability under some conditions among the experts than the novices in terms of the locations visited. However, experts spent approximately 50% longer than novices inspecting the images, which may have led to differences in strategies adopted by the two groups. A second experiment used trials that always lasted 20 seconds and found that under these time-controlled circumstances, experts were more consistent as a group than novices. Experts also had higher accuracy, spent a greater proportion of time inspecting the latent prints, and had shorter saccades than novices. However, the two groups spent an equal time looking at regions that contained minutiae. The results are generally consistent with experts relying on a common set of features that they choose to move their gaze to under time-limited conditions.

[1]  Bryan Found,et al.  Visual Attention and Expertise for Forensic Signature Analysis , 2006, Journal of forensic sciences.

[2]  Claudia Mello-Thoms,et al.  Using gaze-tracking data and mixture distribution analysis to support a holistic model for the detection of cancers on mammograms. , 2008, Academic radiology.

[3]  Leonidas J. Guibas,et al.  The Earth Mover's Distance as a Metric for Image Retrieval , 2000, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[4]  Philip M. Merikle,et al.  Perception below the Objective Threshold? , 1993, Consciousness and Cognition.

[5]  G. D. Bond,et al.  Deception Detection Expertise , 2008, Law and human behavior.

[6]  H L Kundel,et al.  Interpreting chest radiographs without visual search. , 1975, Radiology.

[7]  I. Dror,et al.  When emotions get the better of us: the effect of contextual top‐down processing on matching fingerprints , 2005 .

[8]  M. Chi Two Approaches to the Study of Experts' Characteristics , 2006 .

[9]  Gary Lupyan,et al.  Language is not Just for Talking , 2007, Psychological science.

[10]  P. Schyns,et al.  Categorization creates functional features , 1997 .

[11]  David Manning,et al.  Eye-tracking AFROC study of the influence of experience and training on chest x-ray interpretation , 2003, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[12]  Richard M. Shiffrin,et al.  Perceptual Learning of Alphanumeric-Like Characters , 1997 .

[13]  H L Kundel,et al.  Visual scanning, pattern recognition and decision-making in pulmonary nodule detection. , 1978, Investigative radiology.

[14]  F. Gobet,et al.  The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance , 2006 .

[15]  E. Conant,et al.  Holistic component of image perception in mammogram interpretation: gaze-tracking study. , 2007, Radiology.

[16]  B. Abernethy,et al.  The relationship between expertise and visual search strategy in a racquet sport , 1987 .

[17]  H L Kundel,et al.  A visual concept shapes image perception. , 1983, Radiology.

[18]  N. Charness,et al.  The perceptual aspect of skilled performance in chess: Evidence from eye movements , 2001, Memory & cognition.

[19]  E. Krupinski,et al.  Visual scanning patterns of radiologists searching mammograms. , 1996, Academic radiology.

[20]  Law. Policy Executive Summary of the National Academies of Science Reports, Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward , 2009 .

[21]  E. Krupinski,et al.  Comparison of eye position versus computer identified microcalcification clusters on mammograms. , 1997, Medical physics.

[22]  Michael Snodgrass,et al.  Unconscious perception at the objective detection threshold exists , 2004 .

[23]  Tayyar Sen,et al.  The Effects of Task Variables and Prolonged Performance on Saccadic Eye Movement Parameters , 1984 .

[24]  R. Bellman,et al.  DYNAMIC PROGRAMMING AND A NEW FORMALISM IN THE THEORY OF INTEGRAL EQUATIONS. , 1955, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[25]  Jeff B. Pelz,et al.  Building a lightweight eyetracking headgear , 2004, ETRA.

[26]  K. Rayner Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. , 1998, Psychological bulletin.

[27]  T. Busey,et al.  Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence for configural processing in fingerprint experts , 2005, Vision Research.

[28]  David Charlton,et al.  Why Experts Make Errors , 2006 .

[29]  Claudia Mello-Thoms,et al.  Different Search Patterns and Similar Decision Outcomes: How Can Experts Agree in the Decisions They Make When Reading Digital Mammograms? , 2008, Digital Mammography / IWDM.

[30]  C. Barden,et al.  Proficiency Testing Trends Following the 2009 National Academy of Sciences Report, “Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward” , 2016 .

[31]  Claudia Mello-Thoms,et al.  Time course of perception and decision making during mammographic interpretation. , 2002, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[32]  K. Rayner Eye movements in reading and information processing. , 1978, Psychological bulletin.

[33]  I. Dror,et al.  Contextual information renders experts vulnerable to making erroneous identifications. , 2006, Forensic science international.