In a Double-Blind Validation Study, using a random mix of prison inmates and job applicants from the
general population, a leading clinical psychologist concluded Boston Biometrics can separate individuals
of low character from those of medium and high character with a probability of more than a 1,000 to 1.

Nearly one-third of the participants in this Character Risk Validation Study were prison inmates seeking Work Release.The other two-thirds
were drawn from the general population. All participants were applying for an entry-level position in warehousing, manufacturing, or administration.
The underlying hypothesis for this Validation Study is based on the belief that there are proportionately more people of low character in prison than
there are in the general population. Thus, if Boston Biometrics’ technology is accurate, the expected outcome of the study should be a substantial
difference between the average character ratings for the two groups . . . with the criminal group having the lower average rating.

The Character Risk Validation Study was conducted by Jordan B. Peterson, Ph.D. – a world renowned clinical psychologist, who has over
70 peer-reviewed articles published in leading scientific journals. All participants in the study took The Boston Test. The participating prison faxed
the completed tests directly to Dr. Peterson’s office. The test participants from the general population were recruited through craigslist job ads by
an independent, third-party HR consulting firm, who tested their job applicants and forwarded their resumes and tests to Dr. Peterson’s office.

Dr. Peterson’s staff assigned random numbers to the tests, deleted the resumes, and removed all the names as well as any identifying marks. With
anonymity assured, the completed tests were sent to Boston Biometrics to be rated on a Scale of 1 to 99, with 99 being the highest character rating.

The results of this Validation Study were exceptional. 25.0% of the criminal group were rated between 1 and 20 as extreme character risks, while
only 6.3% of the non-criminal group were in this Extremely Low Character category. Conversely, 26.6% of the non-criminal group were rated between
80 and 99 as good character risks, while only 8.8% of the criminal group were in this High Character category.

Dr. Peterson’s report concluded Boston Biometrics’ Character Risk Ratings were 3+ standard deviations off norm. Thus, the probability was more
than 1,000-to-1 that Boston Biometrics could separate applicants of low character from those of high character. The Validation Study proved that
Boston Biometrics’ technology can accurately identify – before the hire – which job applicants pose the greatest character risk to an employer . . .
regardless of whether they have a criminal record or not. The chart below compares the ratings of the criminal group with the non-criminal group.