Version 1 / Date of Issue: 10.29.15 / Issuing Authority: Forensic Science Standards Board (FSSB)

OSAC Research Needs Assessment Form

Title of research need:

Keywords:

Submitting subcommittee(s): Date Approved:

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

Background information:

1. Description of research need:

2. Key bibliographic references relating to this research need:

3a. In what ways would the research results improve current laboratory capabilities?

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 and to develop testing materials. Research is also required to validate the 

methods used by trained examiners to compare faces (e.g. the feature-by-feature morphological 

approach) and establish effective case management and bias mitigation strategies.

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.

Ensure laboratories employ effective testing and training of examiners and that facial examinations 

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

facial image examiners.

Human Factors in Facial Image Comparison

Training, Competency, Testing, Validation, Bias

Facial Identification 1/29/16
Version 1 / Date of Issue: 10.29.15 / Issuing Authority: Forensic Science Standards Board (FSSB)

3b. In what ways would the research results improve understanding of the scientific basis for the 

subcommittee(s)?

3c. In what ways would the research results improve services to the criminal justice system?

4. Status assessment (I, II, III, or 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.

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

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

of proficiency tests. Facilitate the creation of standards and best practice in human facial image 

comparison. This has the potential means for improving our scientific method and strengthening 

the application of ACE-V to facial comparison.

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

that expert conclusions are justified

II
Version 1 / Date of Issue: 10.29.15 / Issuing Authority: Forensic Science Standards Board (FSSB)

// Approval date:

(Approval is by majority vote of subcommittee. Once approved, forward to SAC.)

1. Does the SAC agree with the research need? Yes ⃝ No ⃝ 

2. Does the SAC agree with the status assessment? Yes ⃝ No ⃝

If no, what is the status assessment of the SAC:

Approval date:

(Approval is by majority vote of SAC. Once approved, forward to NIST for posting.)

29Jan2016 Subcommittee

SAC

6/15/16