The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Failure of anthropometry as a facial identification technique using high-quality photographs
Abstract
Abstract: Anthropometry can be used in certain circumstances to facilitate comparison of a photograph of a suspect with that of the potential offender from surveillance footage. Experimental research was conducted to determine whether anthropometry has a place in forensic practice in confirming the identity of a suspect from a surveillance video. We examined an existing database of photographic lineups, where one video image was compared against 10 photographs, which has previously been used in psychological research. Target (1) and test (10) photos were of high quality, although taken with a different camera. The anthropometric landmarks of right and left ectocanthions, nasion, and stomion were chosen, and proportions and angle values between these landmarks were measured to compare target with test photos. Results indicate that these measurements failed to accurately identify targets. There was also no indication that any of the landmarks made a better comparison than another. It was concluded that, for these landmarks, this method does not generate the consistent results necessary for use as evidence in a court of law.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
There is a concerning lack of standardization of required CCTV installation, recording conditions, and image quality.
“While this global increase in CCTV data is beneficial to criminal investigation and facial comparison, there is a concerning lack of standardization of required installation, recording conditions, and image quality [20,82,89,90,91,92].”
From Forensic Facial Comparison: Current Status, Limitations, and Future Directions (2021) · cites this paper as [89]
Most systems are notably still lacking in applicability for facial comparison and are primarily disadvantaged not by installation and recording conditions but by image quality.
“Most systems are notably still lacking in applicability for facial comparison and are primarily disadvantaged not by installation and recording conditions but by image quality [20,82,89,90,92].”
From Forensic Facial Comparison: Current Status, Limitations, and Future Directions (2021) · cites this paper as [89]
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 21
- Moenssens AA, 1971, Fingerprint techniques, 16
- Cole S, 2002, Suspect identities: a history of fingerprinting and criminal identification
- Taylor D, 1993, An anthropometric study of pedophiles and rapists, J Forensic Sci, 38, 765, 10.1520/JFS13471J · DOI
- 10.1520/JFS15168J · DOI
- 10.1016/0300-5712(95)00081-X · DOI
- 10.1597/1545-1569(1996)033<0010:AOAMPP>2.3.CO;2 · DOI
- Işcan M, 1993, Forensic analysis of the skull, in Introduction of techniques for photographic comparison: potential and problems, 57
- 10.1016/S0379-0738(00)00290-5 · DOI
- 10.1016/0379-0738(92)90142-J · DOI
- 10.1016/j.forsciint.2004.09.065 · DOI
- Lewis DL, 2004, Surveillance video in law enforcement, J Forensic Ident, 54, 547
- Aldridge J, 1994, Effective CCTV security and safety systems, CCTV Today, 12
- 10.1037/1076-898X.5.4.339 · DOI · Paper page
- Farkas LG, 1994, Anthropometry of the head and face
- Wells GL, 1998, Eyewitness identification procedures: recommendations for lineups and photospreads, Law Hum Behav, 22, 1, 10.1023/A:1025750605807 · DOI
- 10.1111/1467-9280.00144 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1348/000712600161907 · DOI
- 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(199706)11:3<211::AID-ACP430>3.0.CO;2-O · DOI
- 10.1520/JFS13998J · DOI
- 10.1016/S0379-0738(00)00149-3 · DOI
- Purkait R, 2004, The measurement techniques: how reliable are they? Anthropometric landmarks, Medico-Legal Update, 4, 133
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Forensic Facial Comparison: Current Status, Limitations, and Future Directions
Bacci, N., Davimes, J. G., Steyn, M., & Briers, N. (2021) · Biology · doi:10.3390/biology10121269 · Cited by 26
Validation of forensic facial comparison by morphological analysis in photographic and CCTV samples
Bacci, N., Houlton, T. M. R., Briers, N., & Steyn, M. (2021) · International Journal of Legal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00414-021-02512-3 · Cited by 23
Metadata
- Authors
- Kleinberg, K. F., Vanezis, P., & Burton, A. M.
- Venue
- Journal of Forensic Sciences
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007-05-25
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 779-783
- ISSN
- 0022-1198
- 1556-4029
- Cited by
- 67
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review