Hall and Player

• What was the background (Hall & Player)?

  Dorr et al gave uni students poor or good quality prints with either low (theft) or high (murder) emotional stimuli

  These were accompanied by disturbing photos of victim

  Results showed that volunteers were affected by emotional context
• What was the aim (Hall & Player)?

  To test the effects of context on fingerprint identification by experts
• What was the sample (Hall & Player)?

  Volunteer sample

  70 fingerprint experts working for MET police

  Majority of them where active practitioners but a minority had managerial roles and were no longer active
• What was the method(Hall & Player)?

  Lab experiment, independent measures design

  As naturalistic as possible, ppnts asked to participate in work time in a typical fingerprint examination room at New Scotland Yard Fingerprint Bureau

  IV: low or high emotional context

  Low being a forgery and high being a murder

  DVs:

  if ppnts read the report

  if the ppnt thought fingerprint was a match, no match or insufficient

  If ppnt felt confident to present fingerprint as evidence in court
• What was the procedure(Hall & Player): Part 1?

  A volunteer's right forefinger was inked and put on a piece of paper

  This was then scanned and superimposed onto a 50 pound note

  This was manipulated to obscure details etc

  14 copies were made which were all of actual size, detail, colour and all representative of quality usually received

  Ppnts were asked to treat the exp like a normal working day but asked not to discuss the fingerprints with others
• What was the procedure(Hall & Player): Part 2?

  Ppnts were given the info and then asked if they though the fingerprint was a match, no match or insufficient

  They were asked why and then given a feedback sheet asking if they had read the report, if they felt influenced and if they felt confident using that evidence in court
• What were the results (Hall & Player)?

  Most ppnts read the report

  Context influenced the perceived effects on experts- 52% of the 35 high context and 6% of the 35 low context felt affected

  HOWEVER there was no difference in the final decisions made in both groups

  BOTH groups had similar decisions about presenting the evidence in court- HC 17% and LC 20%
• What were the conclusions (Hall & Player)?

  Emotional context affects an expert's analysis but not their final decision

  The severity of a case affects analysis but not their final decision

  Details of an individual crime that is already provided with fingerprints may be a surplus than what is required