FINAL by: OSAC Program Office; Version 2, January 13, 2020 1

OSAC RESEARCH NEEDS ASSESSMENT FORM

Title of research need: Human Factors in Facial Image Comparison

Describe

the need:

Human examiners are typically required to make the final decision in facial comparison 

tasks (e.g. one-to-one facial image comparison, border control and verifying one-to-many 

searches using an algorithm). Research has demonstrated that untrained humans have a 

wide range in innate ability when comparing faces.

Further research is required to determine effective strategies for training in facial 

comparison taking into consideration time constraints (e.g. border control) and purpose of 

analysis (e.g. intelligence/lead generation/evidential). This includes identifying appropriate 

testing materials and a test delivery interface. 

Additional research is required to validate the methods currently used by trained 

examiners to compare faces (e.g. the feature-by-feature morphological approach). 

Unconscious bias & same race effect are recognized factors in comparison. Research is 

required to understand human bias & mitigation strategies and develop training for human 

examiners. 

Keyword(s): Training, Competency, Testing, Validation, Bias

Submitting subcommittee(s): Facial Identification Date Approved: February 26, 2021

(If SAC review identifies additional subcommittees, add them to the box above.)

Background Information:

1. Does this research need address a gap(s) in a current or planned standard? (ex.: Field identification system 

for on scene opioid detection and confirmation)

Yes. This research is required to provide the evidence base for the standards Guide for Facial Comparison Training of 

Reviewers to Competency and Guide for Facial Comparison Training for Examiners to Competency.

2. Are you aware of any ongoing research that may address this research need that has not yet been published 

(e.g., research presented in conference proceedings, studies that you or a colleague have participated in but 

have yet to be published)?

‘Expertise in applied face matching: training, forensic examiners, super matchers and algorithms.’ – Reuben Moreton 

– in draft

3. Key bibliographic references relating to this research need: (ex.: Toll, L., Standifer, K. M., Massotte, D., eds. 

(2019). Current Topics in Opioid Research. Lausanne: Frontiers Media SA. doi: 10.3389/978-2-88963-180-3)

White et al. 2014. Passport Officers' Errors in Face Matching. PloS ONE 9(8): e103510.

David White, P. Jonathon Phillips, Carina A. Hahn, Matthew Hill, and Alice J. O'Toole (2015). Perceptual expertise in 

forensic facial image comparison. Proceedings from the Royal Society, 282.

Russell, R., Duchaine, B., & Nakayama, K. (2009). Super-recognizers: People with extraordinary face recognition ability 

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 252-257. doi:10.3758/PBR.16.2.252. 
FINAL by: OSAC Program Office; Version 2, January 13, 2020 2

Burton, A. M., White, D., & McNeill, A. (2010). The Glasgow face matching test. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 286–

291. DOI: 10.3758/BRM.42.1.286

http://oro.open.ac.uk/59338/1/59338.pdf

4. Review the annual operational/research needs published by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) at 

https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/forensic-science-research-and-development-technology-working-groupoperational#latest? Is your research need identified by NIJ?

No.

5. In what ways would the research results improve current laboratory capabilities?

Ensure agencies employ effective testing and training of facial reviewers/examiners and that facial examinations are 

conducted using effective and validated methods. This would likely improve efficiency and accuracy among facial 

image examiners.

6. In what ways would the research results improve understanding of the scientific basis for the 

subcommittee(s)?

Identify effective strategies for training in facial review & comparison and establish methods for the creation of 

proficiency tests. Facilitate the creation of standards and best practice in human facial image comparison. For 1:1 

facial image comparison, this has the potential means for improving our scientific method and strengthening the 

application of ACE-V to facial comparison.

7. In what ways would the research results improve services to the criminal justice system?

Ensure that facial review and facial comparisons are undertaken in a manner that minimizes bias and when 

undertaken in a real time context (such as border control) ensures that subjects are engaged/stopped only where 

necessary. Ensure facial examiners provide informed and objective opinions in court, mitigate bias and ensure that 

expert conclusions are justified.

8. Status assessment (I, II, III, or IV): II

Major gap in 

current 

knowledge

Minor gap in 

current 

knowledge

No or limited

current research is 

being conducted I III

Existing current 

research is being 

conducted II IV

This research need has been identified by one or more subcommittees of OSAC and is being provided as an 

informational resource to the community.