How signature complexity affects expert and lay ability to distinguish genuine, disguised and simulated signatures

Abstract

This study examined how variations in signature complexity affected the ability of forensic document examiners (FDEs) and laypeople to determine whether signatures are authentic or simulated (forged), as well as whether they are disguised. Forty-five FDEs from nine countries evaluated nine different signature comparisons in this online study. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analyses revealed that FDEs performed in excess of chance levels, but performance varied as a function of signature complexity: Sensitivity (the true-positive rate) did not differ much between complexity levels (i.e., 65% vs. 79% vs. 79% for low vs medium vs high complexity), but specificity (the true-negative rate) was the highest (95%) for the medium complexity signatures and lowest (73%) for low complexity signatures. The specificity of high-complexity signatures (83%) was between these values. The sensitivity for disguised comparisons was only 11% and did not vary across complexity levels. One hundred-one novices also completed the study. A comparison of the area under the ROC curve (AUCs) revealed that FDEs outperformed novices in medium and high-complexity signatures but not low-complexity signatures. Novices also struggled to detect disguised signatures. While these findings elucidate the role of signature complexity in lay and expert evaluations, the error rates observed here may differ from those in forensic practice due to differences in the experimental stimuli and circumstances under which they were evaluated. This investigation of the role of signature complexity in the evaluation process was not intended to estimate error rates in forensic practice.

Keywords: decision making; expertise; forensic document examiners; human factors; inconclusives; pattern comparison.