CLPEX Chat Board

Every profession has specific abilities and talents that are needed to excel in doing the job.
We (a team of 7 people, see at: http://www.CCI-hq.com/index.php?siteID=5) are developing tests which will enable to assess and quantify those cognitive abilities needed to do latent fingerprint examination ('Cognitive Profiles' -for those interested, we have done similar work with the US Air Force, see unclassified information about it at: http://www.cci-hq.com/Dror_JAP_visual-s ... pilots.pdf ).

These tests are most useful for screening and selection during recruitment. The scientific development of the cognitive profiles and the tools to measure them, piloting the tests, validation, and cross validation is a 20-months project we are working on. The Cognitive Profile (CogPro) measures encompasses a battery of 10 tests, each taking 5-10 minutes to complete. We are now 9 months into the project, and once the project is finished we will publish an article specifying how we developed the tests, the data, and all details; and the tests will be available for latent fingerprint laboratories in the US (free of charge).

The reason for this posting is that I am seeking to find a number of latent fingerprint laboratories to test run our cognitive profile measurements during recruitment (all tests have IRB approval). So, if your lab is going to recruit new examiners, we would want to run cognitive tests on all the applicants. We would then provide you (the lab manager, or whomever is making the selection decision) with scores for each candidate which quantify their cognitive abilities to do latent fingerprint examination. This would be a test run for us, and we would seek feedback from you, the candidates, and all stakeholders. We hope to be able to test run the cognitive profiles in about 4-7 months. So, if your lab may be interested, please send an e-mail to: CogPro@CCI-hq.com

Thank you,


Itiel

Hi Dr Dror
In all 3 professions I have joined, (a technician for NCR - a USA based company, a constable with NZP and as a Fingerprint trainee Officer with NZP I have had to sit tests like these, I was under the impression this was standard procedure for employers.

Oh well, I feel hard done by if its not, well not really what would be the point of employing me if I had no aptitude for the job, and aptitude test were what they were called.

Or is this something quite different?

Bill Byford of the Greater Manchester Police presented a paper at the Israel Fingerprint Symposium in 1995 on preemployment aptitude testing for latent print examiners. He was looking for a tool to administer to LPE applicants that would accurately predict which applicants would be more skilled five years after hire, and which would least likely become skilled. After much research, Byford concluded that the "Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices" is a valid predictor of latent print examiner skill. I would like to know from some of our friends in the UK if Byford's work was taken seriously there, and whether GMP or any other British agencies are currently using Raven's.

Unfortuantely, nobody in the US picked up on Byford and validated Raven's in this country. I know of at least two starts on that project, but neither made it to fruition for one reason or another. Some research has been done on the subject and a few presentations and articles have appeared since then, but to the best of my knowledge no validated test that an HR Office would accept has yet been put forward. If I'm wrong about that, I hope somebody who is aware of a validated preemployoment aptitude test would post here and let us know.

I know a few agencies use an actual fingerprint comparison test for preemployment testing. The test I have seen gives a series of questions, each having six fingerprints. The first is the questioned print, and the applicant must choose the correct match from the other five fingerprints. It starts with exceeding easy Level 1 exclusions, then progresses through the test to prints in which close discernment at Level 2 is required. It may or may not be a good predictor of potential ability, and my worry is that someone who has a minimum of training would do better on that test than an true neophyte who might actually have a higher aptitude. Still, it is the best test I've seen yet in the US.

I wish Dr. Dror and his colleagues the best of luck. Aptitude needs to be assured in applicants before they are hired. To hire and attempt to train a person with low aptitude is neither fair to the new hire nor to the department spending its money to try and develop that employee. Unfortunately, in the US, that happens far too often.

In many orgnizations in the United States, there are human resource regulations and laws that prohibit certain types of testing. Whether this type of testing or any other type of testing would be alowed or prohibited would have to be answered by someone well-versed in HSR law. And, even IF the law allowed it, the internal policies of the governing body, such as the city, state or county HR organization, may not allow it. One may even find variations within a state. What is allowed in one agency may be prohibited in another in the same jurisdiction, such as the police department vs the fire and rescue or education department.

Personally, there have been occasions I would like to have seen an English composition test be given to applicants.

(I wish this forum had a spell-checker)

Bill

Bill wrote:And, even IF the law allowed it, the internal policies of the governing body, such as the city, state or county HR organization, may not allow it.

The anticipated objections by HR departments were one of the reasons the use of Ravens never got off the ground in the US, I think. I know of two different starts to validate that test in a manner similar to what Byford did at GMP. The problem both times was two fold: 1) Police departments don't fund research, and 2) Backlog case submissions didn't allow the time.

That's why, if Dr. Dror produces a validated test, I would be happy to see it hit the market.

Bill wrote:I wish this forum had a spell-checker.

I'm with you! I have finally got to where I usually type my response in a word document, run spell check, then copy and paste my comments into the reply box here.

Thank you for all your comments. I am still looking for a laboratory/agency that is going to recruit in a few months (even 6 or more months) where we can test the new Cognitive Profiles test battery. We have piloted it, and have tested over 300 forensic examiners, but want to use it during an actual recruitment. If you think it may be possible at your agency/laboratory, please do let me know and we can discuss this further (Itiel@CCI-hq.com).


As per:

Neville wrote:as a Fingerprint trainee Officer with NZP I have had to sit tests like these, I was under the impression this was standard procedure for employers.

As part of this project we did an extensive survey of existing tests (not only in fingerprinting and other forensic discipline, but in other domains, such as for people who do X-ray airport security screening). We have a 120 page report on this, which we are now writing up as a paper for publication. In a nutshell, there are tests that are scientifically developed and validated, but not suitable or designed for doing latent fingerprint work; then there are tests designed for latent fingerprint work, but they are not scientifically developed nor validated. We began this project with the survey, then we interviewed in detail 40 examiners and people who do training, to get their insights as to what aptitudes are needed for the job. Based on this we developed a battery of tests, which we piloted with hundreds of examiners, and will be doing cross validation soon. However, we want to try it as part of a real recruitment, and hence my posting asking to see if anyone is recruiting in the next few months.


As per:

Pat A. Wertheim wrote: After much research, Byford concluded that the "Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices" is a valid predictor of latent print examiner skill.

This is a classic example of a test that was not developed for latent print examiners, and is not suitable (have a look at the test and see for yourself that many of the components of the test clearly have nothing to do with fingerprint examination). There has been no scientific research on this, and no one has shown that this test, or any other, is a valid predictor.


As per:

Pat A. Wertheim wrote:I know a few agencies use an actual fingerprint comparison test for preemployment testing.

Yes, I have see tests that use actual prints, but there are a few problems, some of which you mention. In this project we are looking at the cognitive abilities, the cognitive aptitude building blocks that are needed to do latent print work. The Cognitive Profile of this profession.


As per:

Bill wrote:In many orgnizations in the United States, there are human resource regulations and laws that prohibit certain types of testing.

Yes, that is very true. We have had discussions with them, and they cannot use tests that do not have proper scientific data to justify their use; the HR people (in US government agencies) have told us that they will be able to use our Cognitive Profile tests as we have data and scientific justification for their use.


As per:

Pat A. Wertheim wrote:That's why, if Dr. Dror produces a validated test, I would be happy to see it hit the market.

The tests will be freely available in the US.


We just gave a presentation on the Cognitive Profile project this week, at the Impression and Pattern Evidence Symposium in Clearwater Beach, Florida. Once the video recording of the presentation will be on the web, I will let you know.

Thanks,


Itiel

Dr. Rebecca Bucht gave a detailed presentation on the CogPro tests at the NIJ Impression and Pattern Evidence Symposium (Clearwater, FL).
You can view the full presentation at: http://projects.nfstc.org/ipes/videos/w ... _Bucht.htm (low resolution) or at
http://projects.nfstc.org/ipes/videos/h ... _Bucht.htm (high resolution).

We are grateful to all the many responses we have received, but are looking for more laboratories that are going to recruit latent print examiners over the next 6 months. We want to provide (free of charge) our tests of cognitive abilities to help screen and select the best candidates. If you are possibly interested, please let us know (e-mail: CogPro@cci-hq.com) and we can provide you with more details and explore this further.

Thank you.

Itiel