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

 

OSAC RESEARCH NEEDS ASSESSMENT FORM

Title of research need: Improvement in the interpretation of glass evidence

Keyword(s): Glass, random occurrence, reconstruction, activity factors, transfer and persistence, 

databases 

Submitting subcommittee(s): Trace Materials Date Approved: September 19, 2023

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)

The use of broken glass as physical evidence is well established in the criminal justice system, as it is 

commonly left behind in the form of trace material in kidnappings, robberies, assaults and hit and run 

cases. Consensus-based standards, research studies, and peer-reviewed literature have laid the 

foundations of the discipline, particularly for the analysis and conclusions regarding source/class 

attribution. Nonetheless, current challenges remain on its use during investigative stages and on the 

overall assessment of the value of the evidence beyond the source level to the activity framework. 

The application of more comprehensive interpretation models is currently limited due to: a) the need 

to increase and maintain databases, b) gaps of information regarding the mechanisms of transfer and 

persistence of glass, and c) lack of studies on the random occurrence of glass in U.S. populations. 

Although some efforts have been conducted with regards to databases and persistence of glass, there 

are no studies that report baseline data of traces of glass in the United States. In the absence of local 

data regarding the prevalence of glass fragments on the general public—relative to those involved in 

an alleged event—the use of glass in our courts would not be used to its full potential.

This research can result in a new standard for the interpretation of glass evidence.

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)?

Members of the glass task group are currently involved in research to address this 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. ASTM E1967-11a Standard Test Method for the Automated Determination of Refractive Index of 

Glass Samples Using the Oil Immersion Method and a Phase Contrast Microscope, ASTM 

International, Vol 14.02 

2. ASTM E2330-12. Standard Test Method for Determination of Concentrations of Elements in 

Glass Samples Using Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS) for Forensic 

Comparisons, ASTM International, Vol 14.02 

3. ASTM E2926-17. Standard Test Method for Forensic Comparison of Glass Using Micro Xray 

Fluorescence (μ-XRF) Spectrometry, ASTM International, Vol 14.02 
FINAL by: OSAC Program Office; Version 2, December 1, 2020 2 

4. ASTM E2927-16. Standard Test Method for Determination of Trace Elements in Soda Lime Glass 

Samples Using Laser Ablation Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry for Forensic 

Comparisons, ASTM International, Vol 14.02 

5. Caddy, B. Forensic Examination of Glass and Paint, Analysis and Interpretation. 1st ed, CRC 

Press Boca Raton FL, 2002. 

6. Coulson SA, Buckleton JS, Gummer AB, Triggs CM. Glass on clothing and shoes of members of the 

general population and people suspected of breaking crimes. Science &Justice 41(1), 2001, 39–

48. 

7. Curran JM, Hicks TN, Bucketon JS. Forensic interpretation of glass evidence. Taylor &Francis, 

2000. 

8. Curran JM, Triggs CM, Buckleton JS, Walsh KAJ, Hicks T. Assessing transfer probabilities in a 

Bayesian interpretation of forensic glass evidence. Science & Justice 38(1), 1998, 15–21. 

9. Curran, J. M., Triggs, C. M., Almirall, J. R., Buckleton, J. S., and Walsh, K. A. J., “The interpretation 

of elemental composition measurements from forensic glass evidence: I, “Science and Justice, 

Vol. 37, 1997, pp. 241-244. 

10. Daeid NN, McColl D, Ballany J. The level of random background glass recovered from fleece 

jackets of individuals who worked in Law enforcement or related professions. Forensic Sci Intl 

191(1-3), 2009, 19–23. 

11. Davis RJ, DeHaan JD. A Survey of Men's Footwear. J Forensic SciSoc 17, 1977, 271–85. 

12. Evett IW, Buckleton J. The interpretation of glass evidence: A practical approach. Journalof the 

Forensic Science Society, Vol. 30, 1990, 215-223. 

13. Garvin EJ, Koons RD. Evaluation of match criteria used for the comparison of refractive index of 

glass fragments,” Journal of Forensic Sciences, Vol. 56, 2011, pp. 491-500. 

14. Harrison PH, Lambert JA, Zoro JA. A survey of glass fragments recovered from clothing of 

persons 

suspected of involvement in crime. Forensic Sci Intl 27, 1985, 171–80. 

15. Jackson F, Maynard P, Cavanagh-Steer K, Dusting T, Roux C. A survey of glass found on 

The headwear and head hair of a random population vs. people working with glass. Forensic Sci 

Intl 

226(1-3), 2013, 125–31. 

16. Lambert JA, Satterthwaite MJ, Harrison PH. A survey of glass fragments recovered from clothing 

of persons suspected of involvement in crime. Science & Justice 35 (4), 1995,273–81. 

17. Lau L, Beveridge AD, Callowhill BC, Conners N, Foster K, Groves RJ, et al. The Frequency of 

Occurrence of Paint and Glass on the Clothing of High School Students. Canadian Society of 

Forensic Sci J 30(4), 1997, 233–40. 

18. McQuillan J, Edgar K. A survey of the distribution of glass on clothing. J Forensic SciSoc32(4), 

1992, 333–48. 

19. O'Sullivan S, Geddes T, Lovelock TJ. The migration of fragments of glass from the pockets to the 

surfaces of clothing. Forensic Sci Intl 208(1-3), 2011, 149–55. 

20. Pearson EF, May RW, Dabbs M. Glass and paint fragments found in men’s outer clothing—report

of a survey. J Forensic SciSoc, 16, 1971, 283–99. 

21. Petterd CI, Hamshere J, Stewart S, Brinch K, Masi T, Roux C. Glass particles in the clothing of 

members of the public in south-eastern Australia – a survey. Forensic Sci Intl 103(3),1999, 193–

8. 

22. Robertson B, Vignaux GA, Berger CEH. Interpreting Evidence: Evaluating Forensic Science in the 

Courtroom, 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons, 2016 

23. Roux C, Kirk R, Benson S, Van Haren T, Petterd CI. Glass particles in footwear of members of the 

public in South-eastern Australia - a survey. Forensic Sci Intl 116(2-3), 2001, 149–56. 

24. Walsh KA, Buckleton J, Triggs CM. A practical example of the interpretation of glass evidence. 

Science and Justice, Vol. 36, 1996, 213-218. 
FINAL by: OSAC Program Office; Version 2, December 1, 2020 3 

25. Zadora G, Ramos D. Evaluation of glass samples for forensic purposes — An application of 

likelihood ratios and an information–theoretical approach. Chemometrics and Intelligent 

Laboratory Systems 2010;102(2), 63–83. 

26. Rupert K, Ho M, Trejos T. Study of transfer and persistence of glass in a mock kidnapping case. 

JASTEE, Vol. 8, 2018, 16-33.

27. Trejos T, Koch S, Mehltretter A. Scientific foundations and current state of trace evidence-a 

review. Forensic Chemistry, Vol. 18, 2020, 100223.

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?

Yes, this research relates to two NIJ research needs: “Construction of new and updating of existing 

databases with properties of manufactured materials” and “Practical statistical approaches for the 

interpretation of forensic evidence.”

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

Glass background surveys have been conducted only outside the U.S., and the existing literature 

suggests several geographical and socioeconomic factors influence the conclusions that can be inferred 

from the studies. At the moment, most U.S. crime laboratories limit the use of glass evidence to the 

comparison of known and questioned glass fragments to make inferences at the source level. Research 

studies that generate data on background occurrence of glass on U.S. populations and that evaluate 

factors that could influence the transfer and persistence of glass will offer the criminal justice a 

valuable body of knowledge and provide a broader contribution to investigative efforts and a more 

comprehensive assessment of the evidential value of glass in court.

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

subcommittee(s)?

At the subcommittee level, this type of research would provide additional support to the interpretation 

and report writing guidelines that are being developed for glass evidence and trace materials in 

general.

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

Having new foundations of activity factors and baseline occurrence of glass would provide 

investigators, forensic examiners, defense and prosecutors, judges and jury with tools for a more 

overarching use of glass to assist in the judicial process. 

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

Major gap in 

current 

knowledge

Minor gap in 

current 

knowledge
FINAL by: OSAC Program Office; Version 2, December 1, 2020 4 

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.