Characterizing missed identifications and errors in latent fingerprint comparisons using eye-tracking data

Latent fingerprint examiners sometimes come to different conclusions when comparing fingerprints, and eye-gaze behavior may help explain these outcomes. missed identifications (missed IDs) are inconclusive, exclusion, or No Value determinations reached when the consensus of other examiners is an ide...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:PloS one 2021-05, Vol.16 (5), p.e0251674-e0251674
Hauptverfasser: Busey, Thomas A, Heise, Nicholas, Hicklin, R. Austin, Ulery, Bradford T, Buscaglia, JoAnn
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page e0251674
container_issue 5
container_start_page e0251674
container_title PloS one
container_volume 16
creator Busey, Thomas A
Heise, Nicholas
Hicklin, R. Austin
Ulery, Bradford T
Buscaglia, JoAnn
description Latent fingerprint examiners sometimes come to different conclusions when comparing fingerprints, and eye-gaze behavior may help explain these outcomes. missed identifications (missed IDs) are inconclusive, exclusion, or No Value determinations reached when the consensus of other examiners is an identification. To determine the relation between examiner behavior and missed IDs, we collected eye-gaze data from 121 latent print examiners as they completed a total 1444 difficult (latent-exemplar) comparisons. We extracted metrics from the gaze data that serve as proxies for underlying perceptual and cognitive capacities. We used these metrics to characterize potential mechanisms of missed IDs: Cursory Comparison and Mislocalization. We find that missed IDs are associated with shorter comparison times, fewer regions visited, and fewer attempted correspondences between the compared images. Latent print comparisons resulting in erroneous exclusions (a subset of missed IDs) are also more likely to have fixations in different regions and less accurate correspondence attempts than those comparisons resulting in identifications. We also use our derived metrics to describe one atypical examiner who made six erroneous identifications, four of which were on comparisons intended to be straightforward exclusions. The present work helps identify the degree to which missed IDs can be explained using eye-gaze behavior, and the extent to which missed IDs depend on cognitive and decision-making factors outside the domain of eye-tracking methodologies.
doi_str_mv 10.1371/journal.pone.0251674
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_2531526362</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A662781704</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_98e50e8165524f62899195ed3e0b12b7</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A662781704</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c669t-1348aca45771b5096836d79a1be66fce6e8662272dfd3ee12f69d0ef1f48f0c93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNk1uL1DAUx4so7rr6DQQLguhDx1zatHkRlsHLwMKCt9dwJj2ZydhpxiQV109vOlNlK_sgpTSX3_mn539ysuwpJQvKa_p65wbfQ7c4uB4XhFVU1OW97JxKzgrBCL9_a3yWPQphR0jFGyEeZme8JExyKs-z3XILHnREb3_ZfpPvbQjY5rbFPlpjNUTr-pBD3-bovfMht33eQUzbuUkB6A_eprF2-wN4G0Z4CKMS3mARk_S3cdJChMfZAwNdwCfT9yL78u7t5-WH4ur6_Wp5eVVoIWQsKC8b0FBWdU3XFZGi4aKtJdA1CmE0Ckw5MFaz1rQckTIjZEvQUFM2hmjJL7JnJ91D54KabAqKVZxWTHDBErE6Ea2DnUoJ7MHfKAdWHRec3yjw0eoOlWywIthQUVWsNII1UlJZYTqZrClb10nrzXTasN5jq5MxHrqZ6Hynt1u1cT9UQ8tUBpoEXk4C3n0fMESVaqCx66BHNxz_m6W3lmVCn_-D3p3dRG0gJWB748YyjKLqMjlXN7Qmo9biDio9Le6tTnfK2LQ-C3g1C0hMxJ9xA0MIavXp4_-z11_n7Itb7Bahi9vguuF48eZgeQK1dyF4NH9NpkSNLfHHDTW2hJpagv8G2Mn9bg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2531526362</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Characterizing missed identifications and errors in latent fingerprint comparisons using eye-tracking data</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</source><creator>Busey, Thomas A ; Heise, Nicholas ; Hicklin, R. Austin ; Ulery, Bradford T ; Buscaglia, JoAnn</creator><creatorcontrib>Busey, Thomas A ; Heise, Nicholas ; Hicklin, R. Austin ; Ulery, Bradford T ; Buscaglia, JoAnn</creatorcontrib><description>Latent fingerprint examiners sometimes come to different conclusions when comparing fingerprints, and eye-gaze behavior may help explain these outcomes. missed identifications (missed IDs) are inconclusive, exclusion, or No Value determinations reached when the consensus of other examiners is an identification. To determine the relation between examiner behavior and missed IDs, we collected eye-gaze data from 121 latent print examiners as they completed a total 1444 difficult (latent-exemplar) comparisons. We extracted metrics from the gaze data that serve as proxies for underlying perceptual and cognitive capacities. We used these metrics to characterize potential mechanisms of missed IDs: Cursory Comparison and Mislocalization. We find that missed IDs are associated with shorter comparison times, fewer regions visited, and fewer attempted correspondences between the compared images. Latent print comparisons resulting in erroneous exclusions (a subset of missed IDs) are also more likely to have fixations in different regions and less accurate correspondence attempts than those comparisons resulting in identifications. We also use our derived metrics to describe one atypical examiner who made six erroneous identifications, four of which were on comparisons intended to be straightforward exclusions. The present work helps identify the degree to which missed IDs can be explained using eye-gaze behavior, and the extent to which missed IDs depend on cognitive and decision-making factors outside the domain of eye-tracking methodologies.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0251674</identifier><identifier>PMID: 34029319</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>San Francisco: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Biology and Life Sciences ; Computer programs ; Crime ; Criminal investigations ; Data analysis ; Data collection ; Decision making ; Drafting software ; Editing ; Eye movements ; Fingerprints ; Funding ; Identification ; Information systems ; Intelligence ; Judicial system ; Laboratories ; Latent fingerprints ; Mathematical analysis ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Methodology ; Physical Sciences ; Research and Analysis Methods ; Social Sciences ; Software ; Visualization</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2021-05, Vol.16 (5), p.e0251674-e0251674</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2021 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>This is an open access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication: https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c669t-1348aca45771b5096836d79a1be66fce6e8662272dfd3ee12f69d0ef1f48f0c93</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c669t-1348aca45771b5096836d79a1be66fce6e8662272dfd3ee12f69d0ef1f48f0c93</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-8148-2018</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8143401/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8143401/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,2096,2915,23845,27901,27902,53766,53768,79342,79343</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Busey, Thomas A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heise, Nicholas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hicklin, R. Austin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ulery, Bradford T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buscaglia, JoAnn</creatorcontrib><title>Characterizing missed identifications and errors in latent fingerprint comparisons using eye-tracking data</title><title>PloS one</title><description>Latent fingerprint examiners sometimes come to different conclusions when comparing fingerprints, and eye-gaze behavior may help explain these outcomes. missed identifications (missed IDs) are inconclusive, exclusion, or No Value determinations reached when the consensus of other examiners is an identification. To determine the relation between examiner behavior and missed IDs, we collected eye-gaze data from 121 latent print examiners as they completed a total 1444 difficult (latent-exemplar) comparisons. We extracted metrics from the gaze data that serve as proxies for underlying perceptual and cognitive capacities. We used these metrics to characterize potential mechanisms of missed IDs: Cursory Comparison and Mislocalization. We find that missed IDs are associated with shorter comparison times, fewer regions visited, and fewer attempted correspondences between the compared images. Latent print comparisons resulting in erroneous exclusions (a subset of missed IDs) are also more likely to have fixations in different regions and less accurate correspondence attempts than those comparisons resulting in identifications. We also use our derived metrics to describe one atypical examiner who made six erroneous identifications, four of which were on comparisons intended to be straightforward exclusions. The present work helps identify the degree to which missed IDs can be explained using eye-gaze behavior, and the extent to which missed IDs depend on cognitive and decision-making factors outside the domain of eye-tracking methodologies.</description><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Computer programs</subject><subject>Crime</subject><subject>Criminal investigations</subject><subject>Data analysis</subject><subject>Data collection</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Drafting software</subject><subject>Editing</subject><subject>Eye movements</subject><subject>Fingerprints</subject><subject>Funding</subject><subject>Identification</subject><subject>Information systems</subject><subject>Intelligence</subject><subject>Judicial system</subject><subject>Laboratories</subject><subject>Latent fingerprints</subject><subject>Mathematical analysis</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Methodology</subject><subject>Physical Sciences</subject><subject>Research and Analysis Methods</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>Software</subject><subject>Visualization</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNk1uL1DAUx4so7rr6DQQLguhDx1zatHkRlsHLwMKCt9dwJj2ZydhpxiQV109vOlNlK_sgpTSX3_mn539ysuwpJQvKa_p65wbfQ7c4uB4XhFVU1OW97JxKzgrBCL9_a3yWPQphR0jFGyEeZme8JExyKs-z3XILHnREb3_ZfpPvbQjY5rbFPlpjNUTr-pBD3-bovfMht33eQUzbuUkB6A_eprF2-wN4G0Z4CKMS3mARk_S3cdJChMfZAwNdwCfT9yL78u7t5-WH4ur6_Wp5eVVoIWQsKC8b0FBWdU3XFZGi4aKtJdA1CmE0Ckw5MFaz1rQckTIjZEvQUFM2hmjJL7JnJ91D54KabAqKVZxWTHDBErE6Ea2DnUoJ7MHfKAdWHRec3yjw0eoOlWywIthQUVWsNII1UlJZYTqZrClb10nrzXTasN5jq5MxHrqZ6Hynt1u1cT9UQ8tUBpoEXk4C3n0fMESVaqCx66BHNxz_m6W3lmVCn_-D3p3dRG0gJWB748YyjKLqMjlXN7Qmo9biDio9Le6tTnfK2LQ-C3g1C0hMxJ9xA0MIavXp4_-z11_n7Itb7Bahi9vguuF48eZgeQK1dyF4NH9NpkSNLfHHDTW2hJpagv8G2Mn9bg</recordid><startdate>20210524</startdate><enddate>20210524</enddate><creator>Busey, Thomas A</creator><creator>Heise, Nicholas</creator><creator>Hicklin, R. Austin</creator><creator>Ulery, Bradford T</creator><creator>Buscaglia, JoAnn</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8148-2018</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210524</creationdate><title>Characterizing missed identifications and errors in latent fingerprint comparisons using eye-tracking data</title><author>Busey, Thomas A ; Heise, Nicholas ; Hicklin, R. Austin ; Ulery, Bradford T ; Buscaglia, JoAnn</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c669t-1348aca45771b5096836d79a1be66fce6e8662272dfd3ee12f69d0ef1f48f0c93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Computer programs</topic><topic>Crime</topic><topic>Criminal investigations</topic><topic>Data analysis</topic><topic>Data collection</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Drafting software</topic><topic>Editing</topic><topic>Eye movements</topic><topic>Fingerprints</topic><topic>Funding</topic><topic>Identification</topic><topic>Information systems</topic><topic>Intelligence</topic><topic>Judicial system</topic><topic>Laboratories</topic><topic>Latent fingerprints</topic><topic>Mathematical analysis</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Methodology</topic><topic>Physical Sciences</topic><topic>Research and Analysis Methods</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>Software</topic><topic>Visualization</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Busey, Thomas A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heise, Nicholas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hicklin, R. Austin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ulery, Bradford T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buscaglia, JoAnn</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Busey, Thomas A</au><au>Heise, Nicholas</au><au>Hicklin, R. Austin</au><au>Ulery, Bradford T</au><au>Buscaglia, JoAnn</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Characterizing missed identifications and errors in latent fingerprint comparisons using eye-tracking data</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><date>2021-05-24</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>e0251674</spage><epage>e0251674</epage><pages>e0251674-e0251674</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>Latent fingerprint examiners sometimes come to different conclusions when comparing fingerprints, and eye-gaze behavior may help explain these outcomes. missed identifications (missed IDs) are inconclusive, exclusion, or No Value determinations reached when the consensus of other examiners is an identification. To determine the relation between examiner behavior and missed IDs, we collected eye-gaze data from 121 latent print examiners as they completed a total 1444 difficult (latent-exemplar) comparisons. We extracted metrics from the gaze data that serve as proxies for underlying perceptual and cognitive capacities. We used these metrics to characterize potential mechanisms of missed IDs: Cursory Comparison and Mislocalization. We find that missed IDs are associated with shorter comparison times, fewer regions visited, and fewer attempted correspondences between the compared images. Latent print comparisons resulting in erroneous exclusions (a subset of missed IDs) are also more likely to have fixations in different regions and less accurate correspondence attempts than those comparisons resulting in identifications. We also use our derived metrics to describe one atypical examiner who made six erroneous identifications, four of which were on comparisons intended to be straightforward exclusions. The present work helps identify the degree to which missed IDs can be explained using eye-gaze behavior, and the extent to which missed IDs depend on cognitive and decision-making factors outside the domain of eye-tracking methodologies.</abstract><cop>San Francisco</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>34029319</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0251674</doi><tpages>e0251674</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8148-2018</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1932-6203
ispartof PloS one, 2021-05, Vol.16 (5), p.e0251674-e0251674
issn 1932-6203
1932-6203
language eng
recordid cdi_plos_journals_2531526362
source DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry; Public Library of Science (PLoS)
subjects Biology and Life Sciences
Computer programs
Crime
Criminal investigations
Data analysis
Data collection
Decision making
Drafting software
Editing
Eye movements
Fingerprints
Funding
Identification
Information systems
Intelligence
Judicial system
Laboratories
Latent fingerprints
Mathematical analysis
Medicine and Health Sciences
Methodology
Physical Sciences
Research and Analysis Methods
Social Sciences
Software
Visualization
title Characterizing missed identifications and errors in latent fingerprint comparisons using eye-tracking data
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T08%3A20%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Characterizing%20missed%20identifications%20and%20errors%20in%20latent%20fingerprint%20comparisons%20using%20eye-tracking%20data&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Busey,%20Thomas%20A&rft.date=2021-05-24&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=e0251674&rft.epage=e0251674&rft.pages=e0251674-e0251674&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0251674&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA662781704%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2531526362&rft_id=info:pmid/34029319&rft_galeid=A662781704&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_98e50e8165524f62899195ed3e0b12b7&rfr_iscdi=true