Abstract
In order for fact-finders to rationally evaluate the probative value of forensic pattern-matching evidence, information about the accuracy and reliability of examiners’ opinions is necessary. Empirical tests of ability and performance, however, must first begin with a claim about what that ability and performance might be. In this article, we attempt to identify performance claims made by forensic pattern-matching disciplines by surveying professional literature published by representative discipline organisations in fingerprints, footwear and tyres, firearms and toolmarks, and handwriting and documents. Amongst these disciplines we did not find performance claims that are readily amenable to empirical testing. To spur progress, we suggest a basic framework to guide forensic disciplines toward formulating empirical claims that lend themselves to scientific testing: stipulate (1) the task you can perform, (2) the necessary conditions of performance, and (3) the standard of performance you can achieve. Once empirical claims are made, empirical tests can be designed and conducted that will help to fortify the scientific evidence base for forensic pattern-matching techniques.