Abertay Research Collections >
Social & Health Sciences >
Social & Health Sciences Collection >
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title: ||A forensically valid comparison of facial composite systems|
|Authors: ||Frowd, Charlie D.|
|Affiliation: ||University of Abertay Dundee. School of Social & Health Sciences. Division of Psychology|
|Keywords: ||Facial composite|
|Issue Date: ||Mar-2005|
|Rights: ||Published version (c)Routledge available from http://www.informaworld.com|
|Citation: ||Frowd, C.D. et al. 2005. A forensically valid comparison of facial composite systems. Psychology, Crime & Law. 11(1): pp.33-52|
|Abstract: ||An evaluation of E-FIT, PROfit, Sketch, Photofit and EvoFIT composite construction techniques was carried out in a “forensically friendly format”: composites of unfamiliar targets were constructed from memory following a 3-4-hour delay using a Cognitive Interview and experienced operators. The main dependent variable was spontaneous naming and overall performance was low (10% average naming rate). E-FITs were named better than all techniques except PROfit, though E-FIT was superior to PROfit when the target was more distinctive. E-FIT, PROfit and Sketch were similar overall in a composite sorting task, but Sketch emerged best for more average-looking targets. Photofit performed poorly, as did EvoFIT, an experimental system. Overall, facial distinctiveness was found to be an important factor for composite naming.|
|Appears in Collections:||Social & Health Sciences Collection|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.