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

OSAC RESEARCH NEEDS ASSESSMENT FORM 

Title of research need: Evaluation into the validity of facial comparison training methods

Describe

the need:

Facial comparison (the comparison of two or more unfamiliar facial images to determine

whether they depict the same individual) is distinct within forensic disciplines, as all

individuals have some level of innate ability in the task. Academic research has

demonstrated that even with high quality imagery innate ability varies significantly between

individuals [1] and that the error rates associated with facial comparison by lay persons are

much higherthan those associated with familiarfacialrecognition (identification ofsomeone

known to the observer) [2]. As image quality decreases [3] or other challenges are

introduced, such as non‐matching expression or pose [4] , the error rate for facial

comparison increases.

To date a small number of studies have demonstrated that trained facial examiners

outperform laypersons in facial comparison tasks [5], [6], [7], [8] but there has been limited

research into what benefit training has contributed to the greater ability of these individuals.

Current research has shown some training benefit from providing feedback on facial

comparison trials [9], working in pairs to facilitate learning [10] and instructing trainees to

use a facial feature checklist [11]. Conversely other training strategies,such as classifying the

shape of features [12], providing basic training in anatomy and photography [13] and

instruction using short online courses [13] have been shown to have no notable benefit for

facial comparison ability. These studies have been conducted on non‐professional

populations (e.g. undergraduate students) and do not accurately represent how facial

comparison training courses are conducted by many agencies or the types of trainees who

undertake them.  

There is a pressing need to conduct empirical validation of current facial comparison training

courses for operational personnel to determine what aspects of training are required to

improve facial comparison ability. This will ensure the quality of training material and

provide OSAC with the necessary data to write standards in training in facial comparison.

Keyword(s): facial comparison, training, competency, learning

Submitting subcommittee(s): Facial and Iris Identification   Date Approved: 11/30/2023

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

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

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, Facial Comparison Training Methods 

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)?

The UK Metropolitan Police Service, in collaboration with the Open University have funded a PhD program

within their Forensic Facial Comparison Unit to research this issue (commencing this year), which in

collaboration with OSAC and NIST can address this pressing research need.

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)

[1]   A. M. Burton, D. White, and A. McNeill, “The Glasgow Face Matching Test.,” Behav. Res. Methods, vol.

42, no. 1, pp. 286–291, 2010.

[2] S. W. A. Mike Burton    Michelle Cowan and Vicki Bruce, “Face Recognition in Poor‐Quality Video:

Evidence from Security Surveillance,” Psychol. Sci., vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 243–248, 1999.

[3] H. U. Keval and M. A. Sasse, “Can we ID from CCTV: Image quality in digital CCTV and face identification

performance,” Proc. SPIE, vol. 6982, p. 69820K, 2008.

[4] R. Jenkins, D. White, X. Van Montfort, and A. Mike Burton, “Variability in photos of the same face,”

Cognition, vol. 121, no. 3, pp. 313–323, 2011.

[5] D. White, P. J. Phillips, C. A. Hahn, M. Hill, A. J. O. Toole, and D. White, “Perceptual expertise in forensic

facial image comparison,” 2015.

[6] K. Norell, K. B. Läthén, P. Bergström, A. Rice, V. Natu, and A. O’Toole, “The Effect of Image Quality and

Forensic Expertise in Facial Image Comparisons,” J. Forensic Sci., vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 331–340, 2015.

[7] D. White, J. D. Dunn, A. C. Schmid, and R. I. Kemp, “Error rates in users of automatic face recognition

software,” PLoS One, vol. 10, no. 10, 2015.

[8] C. Wilkinson and R. Evans, “Are facial image analysis experts any better than the general public at

identifying individuals from CCTV images?,” Sci. Justice, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 191–196, 2009.

[9] D. White, R. I. Kemp, R. Jenkins, and A. M. Burton, “Feedback training for facial image comparison,”

Psychon. Bull. {&} Rev., vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 100–106, 2014.

[10] A. J. Dowsett and A. M. Burton, “Unfamiliar face matching: Pairs out‐perform individuals and provide

a route to training,” Br. J. Psychol., vol. 106, no. 3, pp. 433–445, 2015.

[11] A. Towler, D. White, R. I. Kemp, A. Towler, D. White, and R. I. Kemp, “Evaluating the Feature Comparison

Strategy for Forensic Face Identification,” J. Exp. Psychol.  Appl., 2017.

[12] A. Towler, D. White, and R. I. Kemp, “Evaluating training methodsfor facial image comparison: The face

shape strategy does not work,” Perception, vol. 43, no. 2–3, pp. 214–218, 2014.

[13] A. Towler, “Match me if you can : Evaluating professional training for facial image comparison,” no.

January, 2016.
FINAL by: OSAC Program Office; Version 2, January 13, 2020 3 

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? 

This research will provide empirical research to inform laboratories on how to effectively train their staff in

facial comparison, improving the quality and reliability of facial comparison tasks and ensuring that training

is delivered cost‐effectively to address this need.

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

subcommittee(s)? 

 

Many laboratories are providing training in facial comparison but there has been very limited research into

how effective such training programs are. This research will validate the effectiveness of facial comparison

training and allow laboratories to update their training programs as appropriate.

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

This research will ensure that personnel undertaking facial comparisons have received effective training and

testing to make sure they are competent at the task and produce reliable and accurate results. This training

is relevant to the entire spectrum of personnel conducting facial comparisons, from forensic facial examiners

to facial reviewers adjudicating the results of automated systemsto facial assessors working as border guards.

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 
FINAL by: OSAC Program Office; Version 2, January 13, 2020 4 

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

informational resource to the community.