Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39900853›Full record

ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2025

Beyond minutiae: inferring missing details from global structure in fingerprints.

Rachel A Searston, Matthew B Thompson, Samuel G Robson, Jason M Tangen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Rachel A SearstonSchool of Psychology, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia. rachel.searston@adelaide.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0001-7295-8021
Matthew B ThompsonSchool of Psychology, Murdoch University, Perth, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5649-1203
Samuel G RobsonSchool of Psychology, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2777-9347
Jason M TangenSchool of Psychology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.

Funding

Australian Research Council IE230100380Australian Research Council LP170100086
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Visual inference involves using prior knowledge and contextual cues to make educated guesses about incomplete or ambiguous information. This study explores the role of visual inference as a function of expertise in the context of fingerprint examination, where professional examiners need to determine whether two fingerprints were left by the same person, or not, often based on limited or impoverished visual information. We compare expert and novice performance on two tasks: inferring the missing details of a print at an artificial blank spot (Experiment 1) and identifying the missing surrounds of a print given only a small fragment of visual detail (Experiment 2). We hypothesized that experts would demonstrate superior performance by leveraging their extensive experience with global fingerprint patterns. Consistent with our predictions, we found that while both experts and novices performed above chance, experts consistently outperformed novices. These findings suggest that expertise in fingerprint examination involves a heightened sensitivity to gist, or global image properties within a print, enabling experts to make more accurate inferences about missing details. These results align with prior research on perceptual expertise in other expert domains, such as radiology, and extend our understanding of scene and face recognition to fingerprint examination. Our findings show that expertise emerges from an ability to combine local and global visual information-experts skillfully process both the fine details and overall patterns in fingerprints. This research provides insight into how perceptual expertise supports accurate visual discrimination in a high-stakes, real-world task with broader implications for theoretical models of visual cognition.

Indexed as

DermatoglyphicsPattern Recognition, VisualVisual PerceptionAdultFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultExpertiseFingerprint examinationFingerprintsForensic scienceGist perceptionNatural image perceptionPerceptual expertiseScene-based recognitionVisual inference

Identifiers

PMID39900853
PMCPMC11790533

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.