Analysis reveals significant predictors of forensic science adoption among individuals and institutions in Kenya, suggesting policy improvements.
The application of forensic science (FS) in criminal investigation remains a global issue. Scholarly literature indicates that factors accelerating the adoption of forensic technology vary from individual to institutional factors, however, scanty research investigating individual or institutional factors accelerating the adoption of FS. This paper examined predictors of the adoption of forensic science and analyzed their significance in accelerating the application of science in solving crime. The study was a cross-sectional descriptive study grounded on social-technical system (STS) theory. Data collected from 146 respondents from Directorate of Criminal Investigation, Kenya was analyzed quantitatively using binary logistic regression. The results show that the decomposed predictor variables, knowledge, attitude, organizational structure were statistically significant (p<0.05) in predicting adoption of forensic science, however organizational culture was not statistically significant (p=.686). The composite individual and institutional factors were found to be statistically significant (p<0.05) in predicting the adoption of forensic science. The study concludes that criminal investigation agencies need to focus on building individual capabilities (knowledge and attitude) and strengthening institutional factors (organizational structure) in order to accelerate the application of forensic science in crime investigation. The study recommends, to the forensic practitioners, that there is need to develop strategic policy designed to build strong forensic department founded on people sub system (knowledge & attitude), work environment sub system (organization structure) and availability of modern forensic technology to achieve optimal application of forensic science in solving crime.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Miano et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: