by Paul Gullon-Scott BSc MA MSc MSc FMBPSS
Following on from my introduction to digital forensics mental health stressors, this article aims to provide a more in-depth examination of two specific operational stressors discussed previously: exposure to traumatic material and high work-related stress.
Digital forensic investigators play a crucial role in law enforcement, particularly in cases involving child exploitation, human trafficking, and other serious offences. These investigators often handle disturbing content, especially child sexual abuse material (CSAM), which exposes them to significant psychological stress.
Compounding this stress are the high workloads and pressures to meet deadlines, often imposed by ever increasing backlogs and the time limits for prosecution, set by the criminal justice system, to secure timely case processing. This article explores the mental health risks associated with exposure to traumatic material and high work-related stress, examines the implications for productivity, and evaluates protective measures for preserving investigator well-being.
Exposure to Traumatic Content: A Primary Mental Health Stressor
One of the most significant mental health stressors for digital forensic investigators is repeated exposure to CSAM and other graphic material, which leads to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and related mental health impacts. PTSD symptoms include intrusive thoughts, nightmares, and emotional numbing. Exposure to this material, particularly first-generation CSAM content that is new and uncategorised, can have a profound impact on mental health.
Investigators exposed to traumatic content frequently experience diminished empathy, which can develop as a coping mechanism against the emotional strain of their work. In the paper, “Avoiding Burnout at the Digital Forensics Coalface: Targeted strategies for forensic agencies in the management of job-related stress” (Kelty et al., 2021), prolonged exposure to disturbing content can lead to emotional detachment, reducing investigators’ empathy not only towards the cases but also in their personal lives.
In their 2021 paper, “Dirty Work? Policing Online Indecency in Digital Forensics,” Wilson-Kovacs et al. examine the strategies digital forensic examiners employ to manage exposure to disturbing content, with a focus on emotional detachment as a coping strategy. Examiners often engage in self-imposed emotional distancing to protect their mental well-being while handling indecent images of children (IIOC). The authors highlight how examiners avoid perceiving their role as “dirty work,” despite the morally and emotionally taxing nature of the material. This detachment helps maintain their professional identity and shields them from the stigma commonly associated with handling such content.
This emotional distancing, while a temporary protective mechanism, can have long-term negative effects, reducing both personal and professional well-being and leading to burnout.
Deadline Pressure and Work-Related Stress
In addition to the distress caused by graphic content, digital forensic investigators face immense work-related stress due to tight deadlines and high workloads. Investigations involving CSAM are complex, often involving thousands of images and videos that must be reviewed, catalogued, and processed within limited timeframes. As the volume of digital evidence has surged in recent years, forensic teams are increasingly pressured to meet deadlines to support swift judicial outcomes, which exacerbates stress and limits time available for recovery between cases.
The impact of high work-related stress and time constraints extends beyond mental health to affect cognitive performance. Studies show that chronic stress impairs concentration, decision-making abilities, and memory retention, which are essential skills for digital forensic investigators. When these abilities are compromised, errors in analysis and evidence processing become more likely, increasing the risk of investigative inaccuracies and delays that could impact judicial outcomes. Strickland highlights that high turnover rates, absenteeism, and low job satisfaction are common among investigators facing chronic stress, all of which undermine productivity and team cohesion within digital forensic units.
Mental Health Impacts on Productivity
The mental health challenges resulting from exposure to traumatic content and work-related stress have direct implications for productivity. High levels of STS, compassion fatigue, and burnout contribute to absenteeism and decreased job engagement. Investigators experiencing PTSD are more likely to feel emotionally detached from their work, reducing the quality of their investigations and potentially leading to errors. This emotional numbing affects productivity, as investigators may become less motivated and effective, experiencing a reduction in focus and problem-solving capabilities that are essential for accurate digital analysis.
Burnout, which is characterised by emotional exhaustion and a sense of cynicism towards work, is a prevalent risk in high-stress roles like digital forensics. Studies, such as “Crimes Against Caring: Exploring the Risk of Secondary Traumatic Stress, Burnout, and Compassion Satisfaction Among Child Exploitation Investigators” (Brady, 2017) conducted in the US, suggest that burnout often results in a loss of motivation and professional disengagement, further hindering productivity. In turn, this disengagement can create a cascading effect on team dynamics, as colleagues may need to cover additional duties, increasing their workload and stress, thereby perpetuating a cycle of burnout and low productivity.
Organisational Strategies and Automation for Mental Health Preservation
Given these significant challenges, protective organisational strategies and automated tools are critical for reducing exposure and managing workloads within digital forensic units. In the UK, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) guidelines advocate a proportional approach to managing large CSAM collections, which allows investigators to review a representative subset of images rather than an entire collection. This proportional approach enables forensic teams to reduce exposure frequency, providing a mental health buffer that minimises PTSD symptoms without compromising evidentiary standards.
In cases involving low-risk offenders, the CPS streamlined approach enables charging decisions based on initial Child Abuse Image Database (CAID) analysis rather than exhaustive image grading. This approach helps expedite the judicial process and limit investigator exposure by focusing on representative evidence and prioritising cases with significant risk.
The integration of CAID is also instrumental in preserving mental health while enhancing productivity. CAID automates the categorisation of CSAM by matching images against a central database, reducing the need for manual review. By using hash values to identify duplicates and pre-categorise material based on severity, CAID enables forensic teams to quickly classify images and focus on high-priority cases. This automation not only reduces exposure for investigators but also significantly improves efficiency, as investigators can process more cases within a given timeframe.
A paper is currently being prepared for publication on this subject as I am aware not all public and private Digital Forensic Units are adopting this approach.
Conclusion
Digital forensic investigators face profound psychological challenges due to exposure to traumatic content and high work-related stress, both of which significantly impact productivity. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, compassion fatigue, anxiety and burnout are prevalent in this field, diminishing investigators’ empathy and decision-making abilities. High workloads and deadline pressures further exacerbate these challenges, impairing concentration and increasing the risk of investigative inaccuracies, absenteeism, and professional disengagement.
To address these issues, a combination of protective organisational strategies, automated tools, and streamlined procedures is essential. The CPS proportional approach and streamlined guidelines for low-risk offenders help minimise exposure frequency, while CAID’s automation alleviates the repetitive nature of manual review and improves case efficiency. Together, these measures create a more sustainable framework for handling CSAM investigations, safeguarding both mental health and productivity.
This integrated approach highlights the need for continued advancements in forensic technology and supportive organisational culture, prioritising both investigative accuracy and the well-being of digital forensic professionals. As the demand for digital forensics grows, adopting comprehensive mental health and productivity-enhancing measures will be paramount to sustaining a resilient and effective forensic workforce in the face of challenging work demands.
On a final note, as a visiting fellow at Southampton University, I am honoured to work collaboratively with Professor Sarah Morris. Together, Professor Morris and I bring not only extensive academic experience but also a depth of lived experience to our work in this field. We are deeply aware of the psychological toll that work in this area can take not just as professionals but also in our personal lives, as husbands, wives, fathers, and mothers. With this understanding, we remain resolute in our commitment to advocate for increased support for digital forensic investigators.
Paul Gullon-Scott BSc MA MSc MSc FMBPSS is a former Digital Forensic Investigator with nearly 30 years of service at Northumbria Police in the UK, specializing in child abuse cases. As a recognized expert on the mental health impacts of digital forensic work, Paul now works as a Higher Assistant Psychologist at Roseberry Park Hospital in Middlesbrough and is the developer of a pioneering well-being framework to support digital forensics investigators facing job-related stress. He recently published the research paper “UK-based Digital Forensic Investigators and the Impact of Exposure to Traumatic Material” and has chosen to collaborate with Forensic Focus in order to raise awareness of the mental health effects associated with digital forensics. Paul can be contacted in confidence via LinkedIn.
Bibliography
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th ed. In Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th ed (Vol. 5).
Bourke, M. L., & Craun, S. W. (2014). Secondary Traumatic Stress Among Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force Personnel. In Sexual Abuse (Vol. 26, Issue 6, pp. 586–609). https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063213509411
Brady, P. Q. (2017). Crimes Against Caring: Exploring the Risk of Secondary Traumatic Stress, Burnout, and Compassion Satisfaction Among Child Exploitation Investigators. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 32(4), 305–318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-016-9223-8
Burns, C. M., Morley, J., Bradshaw, R., & Domene, J. (2008). The emotional impact on and coping strategies employed by police teams investigating internet child exploitation. Traumatology, 14(2), 20–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534765608319082
Denk-Florea, C.-B., Gancz, B., Gomoiu, A., Ingram, M., Moreton, R., & Pollick, F. (2020). Understanding and supporting law enforcement professionals working with distressing material: Findings from a qualitative study. (Vol. 15). Public Library of Science. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0242808
Devlin, C., Chadwick, S., Moret, S., Baechler, S., Rossy, Q., & Morelato, M. (2024). Illuminating the dark web market of fraudulent identity documents and personal information: An international and Australian perspective. Forensic Science International, 363, 112203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2024.112203
Duran, F., & Woodhams, J. (2022). Impact of Traumatic Material on Professionals in Analytical and Secondary Investigative Roles Working in Criminal Justice Settings: A Qualitative Approach. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 37(4), 904–917. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-022-09532-8
Edelmann, R. J. (2010). Exposure to child abuse images as part of one’s work: Possible psychological implications. In Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology (Vol. 21, Issue 4, pp. 481–489). https://doi.org/10.1080/14789940903540792
Edwards, A.-M., & Kotera, Y. (2021). Mental Health in the UK Police Force: A Qualitative Investigation into the Stigma with Mental Illness. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 19(4), 1116–1134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-019-00214-x
Gullon-Scott, P., & Johnson, D. (2024). UK-based digital forensic investigators and the impact of exposure to traumatic material. In Journal of Criminological Research, Policy and Practice: Vol. ahead-of-print (Issue ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/JCRPP-08-2023-0047
Holt, T. J., Blevins, K. R., & Burruss, G. W. (2012). Examining the stress, satisfaction, and experiences of computer crime examiners. Journal of Crime and Justice, 35(1), 35–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/0735648X.2011.631401
Indecent and Prohibited Images of Children (2024). https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/indecent-and-prohibited-images-children
Kelty, S. F., McQueen, E., Pymont, C., & Green, N. (2021). Avoiding Burnout at the Digital Forensics Coalface: Targeted strategies for forensic agencies in the management of job-related stress. Forensic Science International: Digital Investigation, 38, 301127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsidi.2021.301127
MacEachern, A. D., Dennis, A. A., Jackson, S., & Jindal-Snape, D. (2019). Secondary Traumatic Stress: Prevalence and Symptomology Amongst Detective Officers Investigating Child Protection Cases. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 34(2), 165–174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-018-9277-x
Meredith Krause, 78 . 20 (January 2009). (2009). In Harm’s Way: Duty of Care for Child Exploitation and Pornography Investigators. In FBI L. ENFORCEMENT BULL.
Perez, L. M., Jones, J., Englert, D. R., & Sachau, D. (2010). Secondary Traumatic Stress and Burnout among Law Enforcement Investigators Exposed to Disturbing Media Images. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 25(2), 113–124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-010-9066-7
Powell, M., Cassematis, P., Benson, M., Smallbone, S., & Wortley, R. (2014). Police officers’ strategies for coping with the stress of investigating Internet child exploitation. In Traumatology: An International Journal (Vol. 20, Issue 1, pp. 32–42). https://doi.org/10.1037/h0099378
Powell, M., Cassematis, P., Benson, M., Smallbone, S., & Wortley, R. (2015). Police Officers’ Perceptions of their Reactions to Viewing Internet Child Exploitation Material. In Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology (Vol. 30, Issue 2, pp. 103–111). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-014-9148-z
Seigfried-Spellar, K. C. (2018). Assessing the Psychological Well-being and Coping Mechanisms of Law Enforcement Investigators vs. Digital Forensic Examiners of Child Pornography Investigations. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 33(3), 215–226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-017-9248-7
Strickland, C., Kloess, J. A., & Larkin, M. (2023). An exploration of the personal experiences of digital forensics analysts who work with child sexual abuse material on a daily basis: “You cannot unsee the darker side of life”. In Frontiers in Psychology (Vol. 14). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1142106
Strickland, C. R. (2022). Understanding the impact of digital forensic analysts’ experiences of working with online child sexual exploitation and abuse [Foren.Clin.Psy.D]. https://etheses.bham.ac.uk/id/eprint/13174/
Tehrani, N. (2018). Psychological well-being and workability in child abuse investigators. In Occupational Medicine (Vol. 68, Issue 3, pp. 165–170). https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqy016
UK Home Office. (2018). Child Abuse Image Database (CAID). https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6644af2d993111924d9d3550/CAID_Brochure_May2024.pdf
Wilson-Kovacs, D., Rappert, B., & Redfern, L. (2021). Dirty Work? Policing Online Indecency in Digital Forensics. In The British Journal of Criminology (Vol. 62, Issue 1, pp. 106–123). https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azab055
Woodhams, J., & Duran, F. (2024). A model for secondary traumatic stress following workplace exposure to traumatic material in analytical staff. Communications Psychology, 2(1), 13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44271-024-00060-1
