THE INVESTIGATION OF THE EFFECTS OF OBSERVER GENDER IN PERSONAL IDENTIFICATION FROM AURICLE MORPHOLOGY

Öz

Objective: Facial image recognition is an important part of forensic personal identification. In forensic applications, this method is used for identifying faces of suspects at the crime scene, to detect the features through the facial recognition, and to compare the facial images of suspects with a criminal database. Apparent effects of gender differences on visual perceptions and cognitions were often reported. The aims of this study were to determine the accuracy rates of identification through auricle for which morphological appearance of auricle shapes with naked eyes by inexperienced volunteers is used and compare the accuracy rates of male and female observers. Methods: This study was performed in three stages: gathering 120 auricle images (60 rights and 60 lefts) of 30 male and 30 female volunteers (between 18-26 years of age); observations of 100 volunteers (50 males and 50 females) inexperienced on identification, and statistical analysis with SPSS-11 Statistics Software. Results: The rates of correct responses were calculated by proportional calculation method as 84.9% (SD:13.43) for all observers, 84.1% (SD:11.68) for male observers and 85.7% (SD:15.05) for female observers. The difference of accuracy rates between male observers and female observers was not statistically significant (p>0.05). Conclusion: Although the differences of males and females in cognitive tasks are well-known, a difference between the genders in the capability of identification through the auricles images could not be determined in the present study. Forensic scientists from both sexes can serve in identification through auricle with same reliability.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• identification
• auricle
• morphology
• role of gender
• forensic sciences

Kaynakça

1. Tatlisumak E, Asirdizer M, Yavuz MS. Usability of CT images of Frontal Sinus in Forensic Personal İdentification. In: Homma N, ed. Theory and Applications of CT Imaging and Analysis. Rijeca: InTech, (ISBN 978-953- 307-234-0), 2011:257-68.
2. Sinha P. A symmetry perceiving adaptive neural network and facial image recognition. Forensic Sci Int 1998;98(1-2):67-89.
3. Yoshino M, Taniguchi M, Imaizumi K, Miyasaka S, Tanijiri T, Yano H, et al. A new retrieval system for a database of 3D facial images. Forensic Sci Int 2005;148(2- 3):113-20.
4. Goos MI, Alberink IB, Ruifrok AC. 2D/3D image (facial) comparison using camera matching. Forensic Sci Int 2006;163(1-2):10-7.
5. Choras M. Perspective methods of human identification: ear biometrics. OptoElectronics Review 2008;16(1):85-9.
6. Bozkir MG, Karakas P, Yavuz M, Dere F. Morphometry of the external ear in our adult population. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2006;30(1):81-5.
7. Brucker MJ, Patel J, Sullivan PK. A morphometric study of the external ear: age- and sex- related differences. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003;112(2):647-52.
8. Rutty GN, Abbas A, Crossling D. Could ear-print identification be computerised? An illustrated proof of concept paper. Int J Legal Med 2005;119(6):335-43.

9. Hoogstrate AJ, Van Den Heuvel H, Huyben E. Ear identification based on surveillance camera images. Sci Justice 2001;41(3):167-72.
10. Asirdizer M, Tatlisumak E, Ozyurt B, Yavuz MS. Determination of the limits of usability of auricle morphology for personnel identification. Journal of Forensic Medicine (Turkey) 2012;26(2):104-14.
11. Choi J, Silverman I. The relationship between testosterone and route-learning strategies in humans. Brain Cogn 2002;50(1):116-20.
12. Cazzato V, Basso D, Cutini S, Bisiacchi P. Gender differences in visuospatial planning: an eye movements study. Behav Brain Res 2010;206(2):177-83.
13. Rilea SL. A lateralization of function approach to sex differences in spatial ability: a reexamination. Brain Cogn 2008;67(2):168-82.
14. Overney LS, Michel CM, Harris IM, Pegna AJ. Cerebral processes in mental transformations of body parts: recognition prior to rotation. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res 2005;25(3):722-34.
15. Petit LS, Pegna AJ, Mayer E, Hauert CA. Representation of anatomical constraints in motor imagery: mental rotation of a body segment. Brain Cogn 2003;51(1):95-101.
16. Zimmer HD. Visual and spatial working memory: from boxes to networks. NeurosciBiobehav Rev 2008;32(8):1373-95.
17. Choi J, McKillop E, Ward M, L’Hirodelle N. Sex-specific relationships between route-learning strategies and abilities in a large-scale environment. Environment and Behavior 2006;38(6):791-801.
18. Alberink I, Ruifrok A. Repeatability and reproducibility of earprint acquisition. J Forensic Sci 2008;53(2):325-30.
19. Alberink I, Ruifrok A, Kieckhoefer H. Interoperator test for anatomical annotation of earprints. J Forensic Sci 2006;51(6):1246-54.
20. Purkait R, Singh P. A test of individuality of human external ear pattern: its application in the field of personal identification. Forensic Sci Int 2008;178(2-3):112-8.
21. Purkait R, Singh P. Anthropometry of the normal human auricle: a study of adult Indian men. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2007;31(4):372-9.
22. Ventura F, Zacheo A, Ventura A, Pala A. Computerised anthropomorphometric analysis of images: case rep