AbstractUnfortunate inconsistency and confusion exists with respect to the term trace evidence. With the term trace evidence, “trace” is commonly used as an adjective to connote the small size of materials (often microscopic) that can be used to aid in an investigation by providing linkages, or associations, between potential suspects, victims, and scenes. This article proposes a resolution of the conflicting definitions of trace evidence. Rather than the widely held view of trace evidence having only associative value, we advocate for the historic and broader conceptualization of the physical traces produced during an event. In this concept, the term trace is a noun. Such traces address interrogatives to develop an understanding of the physical record and a reconstruction of the activities taking place during events under investigation. Additionally, it must be recognized that adherence to the scientific method during an investigation is imperative for the understanding of traces, and, at a minimum, input by educated and experienced scientists is required to maximize the value that traces contribute to investigations.This article is categorized under: Forensic Science in Action/Crime Scene Investigation > Epistemology and Method Forensic Science in Action/Crime Scene Investigation > Crime Scene Reconstruction Forensic Chemistry and Trace Evidence > Trace Evidence