IJPLD LOGO

Examining Errors in Forensic Signature Analysis: A Statistical Perspective

Authors

  • Aziz Ben Jemia

    University of San Francisco
    Author

  • Alexander Plant

    University College of London
    Author

  • Stephen Foster

    Penn State York
    Author

Keywords:

Forensic, Statistical Analysis, Ramifications

Abstract

This paper investigates modern viewpoints and real-world applications of statistical analysis in the forensic examination of signatures. It explores the use of confidence interval analysis and the determination of optimal sample sizes based on the desired confidence level. Furthermore, it discusses the subjective nature of expert opinions and elucidates approaches to incorporate and analyze these perspectives using relevant data and statistical tests. Lastly, the study examines the challenges associated with meeting the 'beyond reasonable doubt' standard of proof in real-world 
scenarios. 

References

1. Marquis, R., Liv Cadola, Williams David Mazzella and Hicks, T. (2017). How to answer the question of error margin in forensic signature examination with a Bayesian approach? Nowa Kodyfikacja Prawa Karnego, 45, pp.9–14. doi: https://doi.org/10.19195/2084- 5065.45.2.

2. Kovari B, Charaf H. Statistical analysis of signature features with respect to applicability in off-line signature verification. In 14th WSEAS Int. Conf. on Computers 2010 Jul 23 (Vol. 2, pp. 473-478).

3. McKeague IW. A statistical model for signature verification. Journal of the American Statistical Association. 2005 Mar 1;100(469):231-41. https://doi.org/10.1198/016214504000000827

4. Srinivasan H, Srihari SN, Beal M. Signature verification using kolmogorov-smirnov statistic. InProc. International Graphonomics Society Conference (IGS) 2005 Jun (pp. 152-156).

5. Dror IE. Human expert performance in forensic decision making: seven different sources of bias. Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences. 2017 Sep 3;49(5):541-7. https://doi.org/10.1080/00450618.2017.1281348

6. Alewijnse LC, Mattijssen EJ, Stoel RD. Minimizing bias in forensic handwriting

examinations. Journal of Forensic Document Examination. 2015 Dec 31;25:17-26.

https://doi.org/10.31974/jfde25-17-26

7. Stern HS, Angel M, Cavanaugh M, Zhu S, Lai EL. Assessing the complexity of

handwritten signatures. Law, Probability and Risk. 2018 Jun 1;17(2):123-32.

https://doi.org/10.1093/lpr/mgy007

8. Hicklin RA, Eisenhart L, Richetelli N, Miller MD, Belcastro P, Burkes TM, Parks CL, Smith MA, Buscaglia J, Peters EM, Perlman RS. Accuracy and reliability of forensic handwriting comparisons. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2022 Aug 9;119(32):e2119944119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2119944119

9. Morrison, G.S., Ballentyne, K. and Geoghegan, P.H. (2018). A response to Marquis et al. (2017) What is the error margin of your signature analysis? Forensic Science International, 287, pp.e11–e12. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2018.03.009.

10. Kaasa SO, Peterson T, Morris EK, Thompson WC. Statistical inference and forensic evidence: Evaluating a bullet lead match. Law and Human Behavior. 2007 Oct; 31:433

47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-006-9074-4 11. Ling S, Kaplan J, Berryessa CM. The importance of forensic evidence for decisions on criminal guilt. Science & justice. 2021 Mar 1;61(2):142-9.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2020.11.004

12. Mnookin JL. Scripting expertise: The history of handwriting identification evidence and the judicial construction of reliability. Virginia Law Review. 2001 Dec 1:1723-845. https://doi.org/10.2307/1073905

13. Guest RM. The repeatability of signatures. In Ninth international workshop on frontiers in handwriting recognition 2004 Oct 26 (pp. 492-497). IEEE. https://doi.org/ 10.1109/IWFHR.2004.103

14. Martire KA, Growns B, Navarro DJ. What do the experts know? Calibration, precision, and the wisdom of crowds among forensic handwriting experts. Psychonomic bulletin & review. 2018 Dec;25:2346-55. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-018-1448-3

15. Elliott SJ, Hunt AR. The challenges of forgeries and perception of dynamic signature 25 verification. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Recent Advances in Soft Computing (RASC 2006) 2006 (pp. 455-459).

16. Rabasse C, Guest RM, Fairhurst MC. A new method for the synthesis of signature data with natural variability. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics). 2008 Apr 25;38(3):691-9. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMCB.2008.918575

17. Clopper CJ, Pearson ES. The use of confidence or fiducial limits illustrated in the case of the binomial. Biometrika. 1934 Dec 1;26(4):404-13. https://doi.org/10.2307/2331986

18. Helwig, N. (2020). Inference for proportions. Retrieved May 28, 2021 from: http://users.stat.umn.edu/~helwig/notes/ProportionTests.pdf

19. Voxco (2021) 'Discovering the margin of error in survey data,' Voxco,

23 March. https://www.voxco.com/blog/margin-of-error/#:~:text=The%20most%20commonly%20acceptable%20margin,%2C%20population %20size%2C%2 0and%20percentage.

20. Diciccio TJ, Romano JP. A review of bootstrap confidence intervals. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology. 1988 Jul; 50(3):338-54. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1989.tb01442.x

21. Morrison GS, Enzinger E. What should a forensic practitioner's likelihood ratio be?. Science & Justice. 2016 Sep 1;56(5):374-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2016.05.007

22. Morrison GS. What should a forensic practitioner's likelihood ratio be? II. Science & Justice. 2017 Nov 1;57(6):472-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2017.08.004

23. Heckeroth J, Boywitt CD. Examining authenticity: an initial exploration of the suitability of handwritten electronic signatures. Forensic science international. 2017 Jun 1; 275:144-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2017.02.019

24. Carlson CA, Gronlund SD, Clark SE. Lineup composition, suspect position, and the sequential lineup advantage. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 2008 Jun;14(2):118. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-898x.14.2.118

25. Dhieb T, Njah S, Boubaker H, Ouarda W, Ayed MB, Alimi AM. Towards a novel

biometric system for forensic document examination. Computers & Security. 2020 Oct 1;97:101973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2020.101973

26. Mazzolini D, Mignone P, Pavan P, Vessio G. An easy-to-explain decision support framework for forensic analysis of dynamic signatures. Forensic Science International: Digital Investigation. 2021 Sep 1;38:301216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsidi.2021.301216.

27. Kulik, S., & Nikonets, D. (2016, July). Forensic handwriting examination and human factors: improving the practice through automation and expert training. In 2016 Third International Conference on Digital Information Processing, Data Mining, and Wireless Communications (DIPDMWC) (pp. 221-226). IEEE.

28. Morris, R. Forensic Handwriting Identification. Fundamental Concepts and Principles. 2021. Academic Press.

Downloads

Published

31-12-2024

Issue

Vol. 1 No. 1 (2024): Volume 1, Issue1 International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Author

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Examining Errors in Forensic Signature Analysis: A Statistical Perspective. (2024). International Journal for Public Policy, Law and Development, 1(1), 53-70. https://ijpld.com/ijpld/article/view/14