Mental Resilience of Crime Scene Investigators: How Police Officers Perceive and Cope With the Impact of Demanding Work Situations

Abstract

This study provides an in-depth analysis of the resilience of crime scene investigators (CSIs) in the Netherlands and how they perceive and cope with daily work stressors. Observational studies within five CSI teams and 35 semistructured interviews with investigators revealed that administrative accumulation, long and irregular working hours, confrontations with human suffering, decision making, and dirty and physically demanding circumstances at the crime scene can be very stressful. By employing strict management of thoughts, visualization, focus on sensemaking, sharing of emotions and responsibilities, and avoiding potentially distressing working situations, CSIs overcome the strain of forensic investigations. However, successful implementation of these resilience-enhancing strategies depends on the availability of several individual, team, and organizational resources. To reduce the risk of health problems and to stimulate positive functioning, these resources require permanent investment by police management and CSIs themselves.

Keywords

resilience coping job resources job demands police crime scene investigators

Introduction

The effect of police work on the well-being of police personnel has been the subject of many studies (see Abdollahi, 2002; Webster, 2013). The focus of these studies has been mainly on identifying the negative effects of operational stressors on well-being. These stressors involve traumatic situations and events, such as facing physical violence, shocking crime scenes (CSs), or victims’ suffering. Several studies have shown that organizational stressors are also strong predictors of a negative stress response among police officers (Brown, Fielding, & Grover, 1999; Kop, Euwema, & Schaufeli, 1999; Liberman et al., 2002; Paton, Burke, Violanti, & Gehrke, 2009; Van der Velden et al., 2013). There are some signs that “key stressors” in the police profession relate mainly to working conditions, such as irregular working hours, inadequate management, heavy workload, and bureaucratic reporting procedures (Dabney, Copes, Tewksbury, & Hawk-Tourtelot, 2013; Powell, Guadagno, & Cassematis, 2013; Storch & Panzarella, 1996).

The operational and organizational stressors involved in police work are associated with a range of health issues such as depression, burnout, compassion fatigue, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD; Carlier, Lamberts, & Gersons, 1997; Gershon, Barocas, Canton, Li, & Vlahov, 2009; Hodgins, Creamer, & Bell, 2001; Waters & Ussery, 2007). A correlation has also been found between police work and drug and alcohol abuse, divorce, and suicide (Chae & Boyle, 2013; Cuvelier, Heuskin, & Bourdoux, 2008; McCoy & Aamodt, 2010; Roberts & Levenson, 2001). Despite these health risks, police officers as a professional group appear to experience relatively few problems from regular exposure to potentially traumatic incidents and routine stress. Studies in this area show that police officers are usually able to deal in a positive way with the demanding working conditions (Brunetto, Teo, Shacklock, & Farr-Wharton, 2012; Johnson et al., 2005; Powell & Tomyn, 2011; Richardsen, Burke, & Martinussen, 2006; Van Beek, Taris, & Schaufeli, 2013; Van der Velden et al., 2013).

At present, police stress research has focused mainly on uniformed patrol officers. Remarkably little is known about the well-being of criminal investigators (Dabney et al., 2013; Sollie, Kop, & Euwema, 2014). This is particularly true when it comes to research into the well-being of crime scene investigators (CSIs). To our knowledge, only four studies have focused on this particular field of work. These studies show that CSIs are exposed frequently to different sources of stress. According to Pavsic Mrevlje (2016), CSIs are exposed to death much more frequently and more intensively than other police officers. This is because they have to encounter explicit, violent scenes of death and are required to examine, smell, and touch the body, bodily fluids, and body parts. The presence of a victim’s relatives or friends at the CS can also be a major source of stress. Emphasizing and imagining what the families of the bereaved are going through upset investigators (Kelty & Gordon, 2015; Vivona, 2014). Next to potentially distressing circumstances at the CSs, other identified sources of occupational stress are shift work and staff shortages resulting in additional shifts or canceling rostered days off (Kelty & Gordon, 2015).

Because of the nature of their work, it is reasonable to expect that the cumulative impact of such exposure may lead to harmful psychological effects, such as burnout and compassion fatigue (Hyman, 2004; Kelty & Gordon, 2015; Pavsic Mrevlje, 2016). In case of burnout, the criminal investigator experiences emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment from prolonged exposure to operational and organizational stressors (Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner, & Schaufeli, 2001; Kop et al., 1999). Compassion fatigue describes adverse reactions investigators can have as a response to a victims’ trauma material with which they may identify and emphasize (Jenkins & Baird, 2002). It involves a state of significant tension and preoccupation with victims’ suffering and is sometimes referred to as secondary traumatic stress disorder.

Several studies show that despite frequent exposure to potentially distressing circumstances at CSs, most CSIs can continue their investigative work (Hyman, 2004; Kelty & Gordon, 2015; Pavsic Mrevlje, 2016). These investigators seem to be resilient, but how are they able to maintain performance and health under stressful conditions? Although it seems that the support of colleagues and humor are found to be helpful by CSIs in coping with work stress, the current literature offers little basis to answer this question (Hyman, 2004; Kelty & Gordon, 2015; Pavsic Mrevlje, 2016; Vivona, 2014). The purpose of our study is therefore to gain better insight into the work-related stressors of CSIs and factors promoting their mental resilience. This study will focus on the following two research questions:

Research Question 1: How do CSIs perceive their work and what impact do operational and organizational stressors have on their well-being?

Research Question 2: Which coping strategies and internal and external resources improve resilience in this specific work context?

Method

Participants

To gain a better understanding of the dynamic processes that effect mental resilience, it is necessary to discover the experiences, motivations, and attitudes of criminal investigators in relation to aspects of their work and interpret these within the context in which they operate (Sollie et al., 2014). To achieve this explorative aim, we used a qualitative multimethod research design consisting of document analysis, participant observation studies in five CSI teams in the Netherlands, and interviews with five team leaders and 30 CSIs. When selecting participants for the interviews, an effort was made to ensure a diverse sample in terms of age, gender, job description, rank, experience, and domestic situation, a technique referred to as maximum variation sampling (Patton, 1990). This method enables us to identify themes that are common across a wide range of CSIs (see also Wright, Powell, & Ridge, 2006). Potential participants were invited to partake in the individual interviews. All the investigators consented. As Table 1 shows, the demographic details confirm that the sample is heterogeneous.

Table 1:

Summary of Demographic Data on the 30 CSIs Interviewed

Variable	Frequency	%
Age (years)
20-29	1	3.3
30-39	10	33.3
40-49	5	16.7
50-59	13	43.3
60-67	1	3.3
Sex
Male	20	66.7
Female	10	33.3
Relationship
Yes	28	93.3
No	2	6.7
(Grand)children
Yes	22	73.3
No	8	26.7
Years of service
5-10	7	23.3
11-15	2	6.7
16-20	8	26.7
21+	13	43.3
Years working as a CSI
3-5	5	16.7
6-10	11	36.7
11-15	6	20
16+	8	26.7
Rank
Special investigation officer	9	30
Senior constable	3	10
Sergeant	12	40
Inspector	6	20

Note. CSI = crime scene investigators.

Procedure

Context Analysis

The first step in this empirical study was to perform a context analysis. Based on policy papers and exploratory talks with three CSIs, a team leader, and a policy worker, we explored the organizational and operational context in which CSI teams operate—how are these teams managed and directed, and which tasks and workflows are used to solve a CS investigation? This research method partly served to select the teams and establish the nature and extent of the work processes that would be observed. At the same time, the data acquired were combined with knowledge on stress in police work from the literature to form the “sensitizing concepts” during the observational study (Blumer, 1954; Bowen, 2006).

Observational Study

In the period between October 2014 and April 2015, the first author carried out a participative observational study involving five different CSI teams across the Netherlands. During this ethnographic study, which involved a total of 440 hr of fieldwork, the researcher kept the same working hours as the criminal investigators and observed their behavior and actions while carrying out a range of different activities. The researcher did not participate in these investigations. Given the explorative aim of this study, no strict observation protocol was used, but “thick descriptions” (Geertz, 1973) were made of special events, the daily process of activities, the physical environment, and social interactions in CSI teams (Mulhall, 2003). By being present during the investigative work at the CS, laboratory research, meetings, and administrative tasks, he was able to gain an understanding of the nature of work that is done within a CSI team and the way in which criminal investigators handle this.

In order not to disrupt the work of the teams, agreement was always sought with regard to whether the observant could be present during particular tasks or not. In reality, however, there were no situations during which observation was not possible. To minimize the influence on the situations being observed and thus minimize any disruption to data collection, the observant always remained at an appropriate distance while work was being carried out, and field notes were made directly following the observation period (Mulhall, 2003). Afterward, and whenever possible “on the spot,” informal interviews were held with the criminal investigator(s) about the impact that these diverse activities had on them and how they dealt with these. To establish trust and “get access to the hidden dimensions of the subjects’ world” (Hunt, as cited in Spano, 2005, p. 594), these informal interviews were conducted repeatedly with the observed CSIs. These took place during car trips before and after the completion of an investigation at the CS, at their workplace during or after administrative tasks, in laboratories when samples were tested or examined more closely for forensic traces, and, last but not least, around the coffee table. This procedure stimulated criminal investigators to elaborate on perceived stressors and useful coping strategies in specific work situations. During these informal interviews, notes were made that were later transcribed verbatim. The findings derived from the observations (i.e., field notes of events, activities, social interactions, physical environment) and conversations were recorded in a daily journal.

Interviews With Team Leaders

The third method involved interviewing the five team leaders of the CSI teams being observed. These interviews related to the performance of the team, as well as aspects such as the nature and scope of the work carried out, work culture, the perceived workload, and developments concerning the personnel. Interviews were also held with team leaders about the performance and state of health of the team members in general (performance at work, rates of absenteeism).

Interviews With CSIs

Finally, several criminal investigators were interviewed in each team—a total of 30. To increase the reliability of the interviews, a semistructured interview protocol was designed, consisting of several broad themes related to stressors, coping strategies, and resources. The interviewer only asked broad open-ended questions and questions to encourage further elaboration and to seek clarification (Wright et al., 2006). The participants had the autonomy to develop their answers in the way that they wanted to. They also could, without any hindrance, tell about experiences that were personally relevant for them. The average duration of the interviews was 89 min (the shortest lasted 68 min, the longest 116 min). In addition to using a protocol, other reliability measures included that the participants were assured of anonymity (to reduce the risk of socially desirable behavior), audio-recording the interviews, and transcribing the recordings word for word. The transcripts were sent to the respondents for review and approval. The transcripts were found to be accurate by all the respondents, and they gave their permission to use the data. The respondent numbers have been included next to the citations used in this article, for ensuring their anonymity.

Measures

Mental Resilience

Mental resilience has been defined and studied in various ways. Based on the work by Reich, Zautra, and Hall (2010), we define mental resilience as the outcome of a coping process in which internal and external resources enable a criminal investigator to continue to function during stressful situations and to recover from such situations in a sustainable manner, while retaining their motivation to carry out investigative work. In our view, mental resilience is not a static personality trait; however, it should best be seen as a temporary and situational condition (see also Bonanno & Mancini, 2008; Kamphuis et al., 2012; Luthar, Cicchetti, & Becker, 2000; Paton et al., 2008; Sollie et al., 2014). Whether a criminal investigator is able to cope with stressors will depend on (a) his or her appraisal of the stressful work situation, (b) the coping strategy that is used, and (c) the resources available to enable him or her to successfully use the preferred coping strategy (Folkman & Moskowitz, 2004; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Prati & Pietrantoni, 2010; Sollie et al., 2014).

Coping Strategies and Resources

When dealing with stressful situations, criminal investigators can use a range of different coping strategies aimed at (a) changing the stressful situation (problem-focused coping), (b) making the feelings evoked by the situation easier to manage (emotion-focused coping), and (c) searching for meaning in adversity (meaning-focused coping; Folkman & Moskowitz, 2004; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). The internal and external resources that are needed to use one of these coping strategies may be located at the level of the individual, the team, the organization, and personal life (Bogaerts, 2013; Kamphuis et al., 2012; Paton et al., 2008).

The theoretical assumptions (i.e., the sensitizing concepts) outlined above regarding the relationship between stressful work situations, coping strategies, resources, and mental resilience are shown in the heuristic model below (see Figure 1). It should be noted that the arrow extending from coping to demanding work situations refers to the change in the stressful situation using a coping strategy and thereby removing or reducing the stressor (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). Furthermore, given the dynamic nature of resilience, our heuristic model includes a positive feedback loop (Benight & Bandura, 2004; Burke, Shakespeare-Finch, Paton, & Ryan, 2006; Tedeschi & Calhoun, 2004). The idea behind this is that positive outcomes can lead to a strengthening of or an increase in the available resources, which may mean that stressful conditions are perceived as less stressful and become easier to cope with, which, in turn, leads to more positive outcomes. Based on this heuristic model, we investigated the mental resilience of CSIs.

Figure 1:

Conceptualization of Mental Resilience in the Context of Criminal Investigations (Based on Sollie, Kop, & Euwema, 2014)

Data Analysis

A thematic analysis approach was used for identifying, analyzing, and reporting patterns within the data (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The data obtained from the observation study and semistructured interviews were analyzed using Atlas.ti encoding software. To enhance the internal validity of the study, the relevant passages from the interview transcripts and the daily journal (consisting data from field notes and discussions with observed CSIs) were encoded and categorized using a process of inductive reasoning (Campbell, Quincy, Osserman, & Pedersen, 2013). This means that the first and second authors each encoded the transcripts independently of each other and then analyzed the emerging codes together. In accordance with practice guidelines for thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006), this process implied (a) familiarization with the data through multiple readings of each transcript and the daily journal and (b) generating initial codes to capture interesting features of the data in a systematic fashion. In each round of coding, the main (e.g., team) and subcodes (e.g., emotional peer support, task related peer support, group dynamics) were discussed between the raters (i.e., the first and second authors) until agreement was reached and it was possible to place all the relevant passages within a coherent code book.

The identification and analysis of themes comprised the following phases: (a) searching for themes by ordering codes into potential (sub-)themes (i.e., demanding work situations, perceived stressors, coping strategies, and resources), (b) generating a “thematic map” of the data by checking whether the themes work in relation to the coded extracts and the entire data set, and (c) ongoing analysis to refine the specifics of each theme and generating clear definitions and names (Braun & Clarke, 2006). During this analytic process, different ways of conceptualizing and representing the data were discussed within the research team. Because we used a consensus approach (Evans, Pistrang, & Billings, 2013), modifications had to be made before agreement was reached on the final set of demanding work situations, perceived stressors, coping strategies, and resources of CSIs.

Results

Perceived Work Stress

All CSIs in the teams had chosen to apply for this job. No one is assigned involuntarily to such a position. CSIs indicated that this choice was not made easily. Although they found the technical aspects of the work very interesting, the significant mental and physical stress associated with this type of work was also a concern to many, when considering to take up this job. The majority had been uncertain whether they would be able to cope with working with corpses and had therefore completed an internship before they applied for a permanent position. This form of self-assessment and -selection is a key factor in the experience of stress among CSIs: Each individual makes his or her own judgment about whether they are able to handle the often distressing and uncomfortable work situations involved in this type of work. The nature of the work also makes the work fulfilling, however, and turnover among staff is low. Some participants even said it was their “dream job.” As a respondent stated, “I think it’s a really great profession, finding out the truth on the basis of pieces of evidence, the silent witnesses” (8). When asked to evaluate their investigative work between 1 and 10, the CSIs gave an average of 8.3 (range: 7.0-9.5; standard deviation: 0.58).

CS investigations consist of five consecutive working processes (see Figure 2). The data analysis shows that the perceived work stress varied for each work process. Criminal investigators indicated that many situations involving investigative work are not stressful. Occasionally, however, specific work situations occur that are experienced as (very) distressing. As will become clear from the description of the data in the next section, the frequency with which these operational and organizational stressors occur varies. Furthermore, there are differences in how these stressors are evaluated by individuals. Some CSIs find working night shifts very hard to cope with, whereas others indicate that they hardly experience any issues at all with this.

Figure 2:

Simplified Representation of Crime Scene Investigation Workflow

In terms of perceived stress symptoms, some respondents reported having experienced times when the stress had become too much for them to cope. The work had led to burnouts for 6 of the 30 respondents, sometimes in combination with circumstances in their personal life. Participants also reported that they knew several CSIs who had suffered from burnout issues in recent years and indicated that they had concerns about the health of certain colleagues. Within the five teams involved in the research, a total of four CSIs had also been diagnosed with PTSD symptoms that were related to carrying out CS investigations.¹

To answer the first research question, we shall only consider the two components of the work process that are a potential source of stress: (a) deployment coordination and (b) investigation at a CS (see Table 2). After the description of the five demanding work situations, the second part of this article will discuss the coping strategies and resources that contribute to the mental resilience of CSIs (this relates to the second research question).

Table 2:

Demanding Work Situations and Stressors for CSIs: Results Data Analysis

Workflow	Demanding work situations	Perceived stressors
Impact of deployment coordination	1. “Peak demand”: administrative accumulation	- Excessive workload - Administrative procedures
	2. “Stand-by” pressure: long and irregular working hours	- Physical exhaustion- Disruption of home life
Impact of investigation crime scene	3. Confrontation with human suffering	- Type of victim- Manifestation of crime- Identification- Contact with relatives of victim- Cause of death
	4. Decision making: dilemmas and doubts	- Doubts about quality of investigation- Lack of professionalism in workplace- Cooperation with other disciplines

	5. Dirty and physically demanding circumstances	- Condition of corpse- Physical strain and disgust
	5. Dirty and physically demanding circumstances	- Condition of corpse- Physical strain and disgust

Note. CSI = crime scene investigators.

Demanding Work Situations

“Peak Demand”: Administrative Accumulation

The workload of CSIs depends on the requests that come in from other police divisions, such as those that are responsible for police patrol. These divisions determine whether the CSIs are needed to investigate a CS. This means that criminal investigators need to be available at all times to respond to call-outs. The workload is therefore dependent on the number of incidents that happen on a particular day. Clearly, this is unpredictable and can fluctuate, “You’re either rushed of your feet or there’s nothing to do” (6). Criminal investigators may be called out to work at many different CSs in a short period of time. Once the investigative work has been completed, there is administrative work that needs to be done too. Criminal investigators must record all their investigative work in an official report, process any forensic samples that have been collected, carry out any further tests that may need to be done (or have these done externally), and add the results of these tests to the forensic file (see Figure 2). Criminal investigators indicate that they spend approximately 20% of their time carrying out actual investigation work at the CS, and the rest is spent on administration.

One situation that criminal investigators cited as particularly stressful is when they continue to be called out to new cases when the administrative work associated with previous CSs has not yet been completed. Such a backlog causes delays in processing the cases that they are working on, which means that criminal investigators can easily lose track of which work has been completed for a particular case, with higher stress levels as a consequence. This is intensified further when cases need to be completed urgently because a detective and a prosecutor are waiting for the results of forensic research. These feelings of stress are also intensified by the time-consuming procedures that criminal investigators have to go through. For example, forensic samples have to be entered by hand into different IT systems, and processing the samples (storage, sending, receiving) also involves a great deal of administrative work. Many criminal investigators experience stress due to the administration involved with CS investigations:

I notice that for most CSIs, the stress is not caused by the fact that they are called out to do investigation work at a CS—the stress starts when they come back to the office. That’s mainly due to all the processes and procedures, all the administration that needs to be done. (7)

“On Call” Pressure: Long and Irregular Working Hours

In order for investigators to be available whenever they are needed, the CSI teams work in shifts—a day shift and a stand-by shift. The day shift typically starts at 8:00 with a briefing and ends at around 17:00. To ensure that criminal investigators are also available outside “office hours,” they are scheduled for a certain number of stand-by shifts per month. After finishing their day shift, criminal investigators who are on stand-by take their service vehicle home with them, as well as the equipment they will need to carry out a CS investigation. Most CSIs view stand-by shifts as a necessary evil (“it’s part of the job”) and they are used to this pattern of working. However, there are situations where stand-by shifts can become a cause of stress due to physical exhaustion and disruption of home life.

If criminal investigators are called out during the night, whether this is just once or several times, they can suffer from sleep deprivation. Any hours worked are compensated, however, not everyone is able to sleep after being called to duty. A number of respondents also indicated that the quality of sleep can suffer if they know that they are on stand-by. They may wake up tired, even if they have not been called out, “It’s still in your mind even when you’re sleeping. Sometimes you look at your phone just to check that you haven’t missed a call.” (25). Particularly during busy periods, when there are many call-outs both during the day and at night, the combination of working long days and not getting enough sleep at night means that investigators can easily suffer from the symptoms of fatigue (lack of energy, irritability, difficulty concentrating). This is not only a source of stress for the criminal investigator affected, but it also has a negative effect on the quality of the work that is carried out (see stressor decision making at a CS). Criminal investigators said that they are sometimes relieved when they are not called out during the night.

In addition to physical symptoms, stand-by shifts can also lead to stressful situations in one’s personal life. Criminal investigators experience stress when their work is constantly present in the background. When they are on stand-by, whatever they decide to do, they need to remain aware that they may be called out at any moment. Usually, it is possible to take account of this, but the disruption can sometimes be a source of strain in relationships with partners, children, relatives, and friends. The burden on one’s personal life and the physical disruption caused by stand-by shifts mean that investigators dislike working several stand-by shifts in succession. Scheduling stand-by shifts is therefore the subject of frequent discussions and dissatisfaction within the teams:

When you are scheduled to work six stand-by shifts and end up having to do ten or twelve of them, that is a source of stress, because that means that you’re maybe not available at home 10 or 12 times. (8)

Confrontation With Human Suffering at the CS

CSIs are faced with a great deal of human suffering in the course of their career. They are therefore allowed a certain period during which they can get used to working at CSs. The CSIs that make it past this phase are usually able to handle the situations they are confronted with at a CS. However, there are CSs that impact even the most experienced criminal investigators to such an extent that their performance at work is adversely affected. It is difficult to define precisely which type of CS gives rise to such emotions, though; this is not necessarily the most gruesome murders or having to work with the dead body of a child, for example. Even a type of CS that has been witnessed many times before can sometimes become an emotional trigger under specific circumstances. On the basis of the interviews and countless conversations with criminal investigators on this subject, five main types of triggers can be distinguished: (a) the type of victim, (b) the way in which the crime was committed, (c) identifying with the victim, (d) the circumstances of death, and (e) contact with bereaved relatives.

The first of these triggers relates to the victim of the crime that is being investigated. The killing of defenseless, apparently innocent people can often give rise to feelings such as grief, injustice, and powerlessness on the part of investigators. This is especially common when the victim is a baby, a child, a woman, or an elderly person. The second trigger involves the way in which the crime has been committed. Criminal investigators are sometimes bewildered and angered by the forms of violence that they encounter—victims who have been killed in the most brutal of manners or individuals who have been murdered by their own partner or parent. The third type of trigger can occur when investigators identify in some way with what has occurred at the scene of the crime. In extreme cases, this might occur if somebody involved in the crime is known personally to the criminal investigator (e.g., a family member, acquaintance, or neighbor). However, similar emotions can arise when the situation witnessed at the CS is very similar to the personal life of the criminal investigator, which means that they can empathize with it particularly easily. Examples here could include similarities in terms of the phase of life and circumstances, physical appearance, or age of the victim:

One case had a big emotional impact on me. A two-day-old baby had died . . . I found this a very distressing case to work on. The grief of the parents was quite dramatic, but the real reason that this case had such an emotional impact on me had more to do with my grandchildren who were also babies at that time. (9)

The fourth trigger concerns witnessing the sad circumstances in which the victims’ lives may have come to an end. A victim may have died due to an unfortunate combination of circumstances (an accident at home, at work, or in traffic), have committed suicide at a young age, or have died in complete solitude and only been found weeks later. CSIs are often confronted with human vulnerability and the negative sides of life. The fifth and final trigger is witnessing the emotions caused by the incidents that they are investigating and contact with bereaved relatives or friends:

While we were examining the body of the victim of a stabbing, his father arrives. He made quite a fuss and would not leave the scene until he had seen his son. Because the investigation was not finished yet, we found a practical solution by letting the family look from a distance. Well, I couldn’t stand to hear all the emotions of the parents and brothers of the victim. I will never, never forget this. (15)

CSIs also indicated that frequently being faced with corpses means that they start to think differently about death. It is not an abstract concept anymore and is less emotionally charged. This different attitude to death becomes particularly evident when they have to cope with the death of people in their personal life. CSIs notice that they often respond differently to those around them. Witnessing so much suffering leaves them emotionally harder. Furthermore, CSIs experience emotions due to the memories they have of certain CSs; this can even happen years after they have completed the investigation concerned. This also became apparent in the interviews. Several participants became emotional when they recalled certain cases that had made a deep impression on them:

On a Sunday morning, four dead bodies were found in a house. I cannot forget the way these people were murdered. It was so horrific, so barbaric. I went with a colleague inside and when we went up the stairs we were shocked by what we saw in the bedrooms of the two daughters. We have examined the bodies right there on the spot. I can remember this quite vividly, because it was very unpleasant. Even now I become emotional by this incident . . . [the respondent starts crying and the interview is interrupted for some time]. (13)

And although the investigators did not see this as an issue themselves, the environment in which they live has become a series of places that remind them of working on particular CSs:

Last week I was at a crossroads and I suddenly remembered a young man who had hung himself in an apartment nearby. I’m not bothered by this, it’s just a part of my job, but my wife asked me to stop telling about it. She said that wherever we drive, I’ve handled cases. (21)

Decision-Making: Dilemmas and Doubts at the CS

When CSIs encounter a dead body, four basic scenarios are possible—there has been a natural death, an accident, a suicide, or a crime. The CSIs, working with a medical examiner and a tactical investigation team, need to determine which scenario applies to the CS that they are working at and find evidence to support this view. At some CSs, it may take less than half an hour to collect pieces of evidence, whereas at others this may take several days. Most CSs result in some degree of “healthy tension” for criminal investigators as they try to find out what may have happened. There are some situations, however, that lead to higher stress levels due to the decisions that need to be made at the CS. The first such situation occurs when there are doubts about the quality of the CS investigation and what can be concluded from the pieces of evidence detected:

It makes me frustrated when no evidence can been found at the crime scene. It is sometimes easy to say “What’s not there can’t be found.” But then the doubts start to nag at me, “Was my investigation thorough enough? Did I overlook anything?” . . . At those times you have to accept that you can’t solve the crime. But that’s a struggle. (14)

CSIs seek to work as accurately as possible, but there are so many aspects that need to be borne in mind during this process that there is a high likelihood of an investigator forgetting to carry out a particular task or missing evidence. This applies particularly to cases where CSIs suspect that a crime may have occurred, but can find no clear evidence of this. The potentially significant negative consequences of the decisions made at the CS can sometimes be a heavy burden to bear:

A case that keeps me awake at night is the one in which a woman was found by her partner down the stairs. He says she fell down the stairs, but I think he killed her and staged the fall. We cannot find convincing pieces of evidence, but my intuition tells me that he did it. (12)

A second type of stressful situation in this category concerns the attitude of colleagues and the quality of the work that they carry out. Some CSIs indicated that colleagues can be a source of more stress than the actual work at the CS. Here they do not mean that they enjoy working with some colleagues more than others, but rather they are referring to the (justified) concern that a colleague may not have sufficient skills to carry out work to a high standard of quality. Stress can arise when colleagues fail to reflect critically on their own actions, draw erroneous conclusions, do not store evidence according to the right procedures, overlook safety regulations, or are not open to feedback. Conflicts within a team and a lack of confidence even mean that some CSIs refuse to work with certain colleagues at a CS.

The third potential source of stress concerns cooperation with other police divisions at the CS and conflicting interests during the investigation. A tactical investigation team will typically want to know as quickly as possible what happened and who may have perpetrated a crime. This may clash with the goal of the CSIs, whose primary goal is to carry out their investigation as thoroughly as possible. Respondents indicated that they had experienced situations in which they were subjected to extreme pressure to act quickly and that they therefore felt rushed. Another source of stress is when the tactical investigation team is convinced that they know what may have happened at the CS and then seeks to interfere with the forensic work and questions the expertise of the CSIs. Young and relatively inexperienced CSIs can be particularly susceptible to this kind of pressure.

Dirty and Physically Demanding Circumstances at the CS

The fifth category of CSI stressors relates to the dirty and physically demanding conditions in which they regularly have to work. Depending on the condition of the corpse, working at a CS can be extremely unpleasant. Physical disgust is a frequent response to the stench of a decomposing corpse, contact with body fluids, dismembered body parts, and corpses that have been damaged by decomposition, vermin, or (domestic) animals. A number of respondents indicated that they had vomited or had had to suppress the urge to vomit during their work:

It was a corpse lying there for a long time and a lot of maggots were crawling around it and body fluids were everywhere. I had to cut the clothes of this rotten body, which were sticking onto it. I’m quite used to do dirty tasks, but this was so disgusting. (24)

Physically demanding working conditions can also lead to stress. Criminal investigators have to work in diverse and sometimes difficult locations, such as in confined spaces, at high altitude, or in the middle of the countryside. At CSs that are outdoors, there may be difficult weather conditions to contend with (rain, heat, freezing cold, biting wind). Working in such conditions over a prolonged period can be physically demanding for criminal investigators. Just as when working in unhygienic conditions, suppressing the urge to finish the work as quickly as possible requires significant effort. CSIs regularly have to force themselves to carry out the research work as carefully as possible.

Coping Strategies That Enhance Mental Resilience

CS investigations can often place significant mental and emotional demands on CSIs. Our data analysis shows that CSIs have developed five coping strategies that enable them to deal with this in a positive way (see Table 3). We will now describe when each of the identified coping strategies is used and how they contribute to mental resilience. We will also identify the internal and external resources that CSIs need to use these strategies effectively.

Table 3:

Coping Strategies and Resources Used by CSIs: Results Data Analysis

Coping strategy	Related resources at each level
1. Visualization Mental preparation for demanding CS	Individual Team, Organizational	- experience of variety of CSs- accurate information (briefing)
2. Emotional distancing Strict management of thoughts at CS	Individual Team Organizational	- task-oriented, rational work attitude- calm state of mind (emotional stability)- sharing humor with colleagues- CS management/protection
	Individual Team Organizational
3. Seeking meaning Focus on sensemaking	Individual Team Organizational	- technical knowledge and skills- participation in decision making at CS- adequate forensic resources and training
4. Seeking social support Sharing of emotions and responsibilities	Individual Team Organizational Private	- social skills- acceptance of own vulnerability- colleagues’ expertise- emotional support from colleagues and team leader- team formation- deployment coordination policy- emotional support from relatives/friends



5. Avoidance Avoiding potentially distressing working situations	Individual Team Organizational Private	- self-reflection- assertiveness- awareness of colleagues- professional counseling- dispensation policy- awareness of relatives/friends
	Individual Team Organizational Private

Note. CSI = crime scene investigators; CS = crime scene.

Visualization: Mentally Preparing One’s Self for a Potentially Disturbing CS

As mentioned before, CSIs are called out by means of a request. Uniformed police officers will already have brought the situation under control and will subsequently inform the CSIs of the nature of the CS in question—what they have found, what type of victim is involved, and which actions have already been taken at the CS. This information enables the CSIs to prepare themselves to some extent for what they are about to witness and the potentially stressful work they will need to carry out. This means that they are rarely surprised by what they find at the CS, “If we are called out to a place where somebody has hung themselves, we already know more or less what we’re going to be seeing, so you’ve already made the click” (4). This helps investigators make a calm assessment of the work that needs to be done and contributes to the coping strategy emotional distancing (see below).

There are two important resources that play a role in this coping strategy: (a) accurate information prior to arriving at a CS and (b) having prior experience of a variety of CSs. Inexperienced CSIs are often unable to prepare themselves adequately because they do not yet have the extensive experience required. For them, arriving at a CS can be a tense moment, both in technical terms (“How will I handle this?”) and in emotional terms (“How am I going to feel?”). As more experience is acquired, investigators are better able to visualize the CS. The availability of accurate information cannot always be taken for granted, however. Several respondents reported having experienced investigations in which they had been given inaccurate or incomplete information. The fact that the CS was different to what they had been expecting led to momentary shock and feelings of stress.

Emotional Distancing: Strict Management of Thought Processes at CS

CSIs are frequently faced with human suffering. To minimize the psychological impact that this can have, keeping an emotional distance from what you are examining is a crucial coping strategy. Respondents indicated that it is essential to prevent themselves being affected by the suffering that they witness. In this context, it helps criminal investigators consider a corpse as a carrier of pieces of evidence, rather than as a person. For this reason, CSIs do not look into the backgrounds of those involved (victims, perpetrators, and survivors), to reduce the risk of becoming emotionally affected. A number of respondents also indicated that humor can help them maintain a distance from what they see at the CS. However, in many situations, humor is impossible or inappropriate because an investigator is working alone or because of the presence of relatives, witnesses, or the media at the CS. Some respondents also reported sometimes being disturbed by jokes made by colleagues.

It requires significant effort and self-control for CSIs to manage their own thoughts when at the CS. For CSIs, it is therefore important to remain calm when attending a CS (“feeling confident and at ease”), so that they can buffer any potentially negative impact. A second individual resource that helps CSIs adopt this strategy is the ability to focus on the task at hand while at the CS. The doubts experienced by investigators with little experience, mentioned previously, often involve doubts about their ability to control their own thoughts:

It might sound strange, but I don’t see it as a human being. I’m able to put that aside. But I do remember thinking to myself: “I’m just going to have to see whether that I’ll actually be able to do that or not.” (10)

Respondents indicated that a number of CSIs in their team were unable to manage this and that they had not continued in this field of work.

A CS that is cordoned off is a third resource for the purposes of this coping strategy. The absence of relatives and others involved with the CS means that the CSIs are less likely to be confronted with “real” emotions. It also prevents the distraction of onlookers and journalists. This means that the investigators do not have to think about the effect of their conversations on other people (such as potentially morbid humor), enabling them to immerse themselves in the technical implementation of their research. As a respondent stated, “You’re working in a sort of cocoon, and that helps.” (14).

Despite the availability of the resources required, this type of coping strategy is not always sufficient to suppress emotions. As described in relation to the stressor involving “confrontation with human suffering,” some CSs can have such an impact on CSIs that they are unable to maintain this emotional distance. Under these circumstances, CSIs have to rely on other coping strategies, such as seeking a deeper meaning, social support, and avoidance.

Seeking Meaningfulness: Focusing on Sensemaking

The field of CS investigation appealed to our respondents and they were motivated by “solving the puzzle” of the CS. The investigators did not experience any issues with motivation when attending a CS and doing their work there. At CSs that are perceived as very stressful and distressing, however, CSIs are forced to search for personal meaning in their work to continue working. Cognitive reappraisal of CSIs focuses on the contribution of their work to (a) the wider investigation process so that the tactical investigation division can continue with its part of the investigation, (b) ensuring that justice is done, (c) providing clarity to victims and survivors about what happened, and (d) the dignity and respect that is involved in investigating the circumstances of the death and handing over the body to their loved ones.

Participation in decision making at a CS is an important resource in the context of this meaning-focused coping strategy. Respondents indicate that knowing the underlying importance of unpleasant jobs at a CS helps them focus on the significance of their demanding work. The same applies to adequate forensic tools and the training provided by the organization. It is very important for CSIs to maintain their knowledge and skills regarding DNA, explosives, blood patterns, fires, and chemicals. After all, this is what gives CSIs the confidence to know that they are able to make the right decisions at the CS:

We want to do our jobs well, because drawing wrong conclusions at a CS could possibly ruin a person’s life. Therefore, I need to keep my expertise up to date and it is very important that the organization provides sufficient training. (30)

Seeking Social Support: Sharing Emotions and Responsibilities

The fact that CSIs become proficient at maintaining emotional distance does not mean that their work has no impact on them. Almost all the respondents indicated that they felt the need to talk about their experiences with colleagues after working at a CS that had an impact on them, “It’s important that you express yourself when something has had a negative effect on you, has made you scared, or has moved you” (19). CSIs call this the “dilution of experience,” “talking things over,” “getting feelings off your chest,” which helps you “face up to your own feelings” and “get on with the rest of the day.” CSIs prefer to share experiences and emotions with colleagues who have worked at the same CS and colleagues with whom they have a good relationship, their “confidants.” They can then talk freely and directly, without it being necessary to consider whether there is any confidential information that they should not disclose or whether the other person will be shocked. In addition, they can learn from each other about how to deal with such experiences. This relates not only to emotional support but also to work-related support. Sharing the responsibilities that are related to a CS investigation helps reduce the stress for the CSIs involved:

Even though I am experienced, I still encounter new situations [at a CS] that make me think: “What now? How on earth should I go about this; I have no idea where to start and what to do?” In those situations, it’s essential that you consult other people. (3)

To use this coping strategy, colleagues who are willing and able to provide this type of support are clearly a necessary resource. However, it is necessary that a CSI has the necessary social skills to ask for such support and the courage to reveal his or her vulnerability or weak points to others. This is not as easy as it may seem. CSIs may be afraid to be on the receiving end of derogatory comments from colleagues, or perceive asking for help as a personal failure. According to CSIs, an organizational resource that can promote this coping strategy is to work in small and permanent teams. By dividing a CSI team of about 40 investigators into four smaller groups, CSIs experience that social ties are reinforced, cooperation becomes more frequent, and closer bonds are likely to form between team members. A second and related facilitating resource is ensuring that CSIs never attend a CS involving deaths alone as a matter of official policy. The result is that CSIs feel that there is someone to help if they have any doubts or are emotionally affected by what they see at the CS:

We work with small, fixed teams. They actually want to stop that, but we are all against it, because in this job you want to be able to talk things over when you get back in. You feel a kind of solidarity within your own team. And you don’t have that if you’re always working with someone else from another CSI team. That might sound strange, but that’s how it works with me. (23)

Some CSIs look for emotional support from their team leader, partner, friend, or relative. However, others emphatically do not call on these resources. The respondents gave various reasons why they do not turn to their team leader for this kind of support. This may be because (a) talking things through with colleagues is enough, (b) there is an emotional distance with the team leader (do not know him or her well enough, lack of empathy), or (c) mistrust caused by previous conflicts or fear of possible negative career consequences. As far as not relying on social support from loved ones, CSIs indicated that they did not want to burden their loved ones with the horrors of their work, or their partners had said that they did not want to hear about it. For CSIs who find themselves in these types of situation, the support of colleagues is even more important.

Avoidance: Avoiding Potentially Distressing Work Situations

During the course of their investigations, CSIs experience the impact that this type of work has on them and they learn to cope with it as they go along. However, distressing work situations can sometimes arise in which CSIs no longer wish to be exposed to the stressors. This relates, on one hand, to distressing circumstances at the CS and, on the other hand, to carrying out too many investigations at once. In relation to distressing CSs, the respondents said that they refuse to accept a call-out if they estimate the chance of being unable to distance themselves emotionally from a particular CS. This may happen with, for example, a scene involving young children or people the CSI had known personally from their personal lives. CSIs sometimes also reallocate cases to colleagues if they are not feeling confident enough to cope and wish to protect themselves from additional emotional pressure:

An acquaintance of mine committed suicide some time ago. I received a call that day for an investigation of a deceased male and went to the given address. Until I stood before his front door, I realized that the deceased male was a friend. I really had no idea that he was doing so bad . . . I decided on the spot not to do the investigation. I didn’t want to see him hanging there. A colleague was called who then carried out the investigation. (26)

They may also take this approach if they feel that they are under too much pressure due to the high workload at that particular time. CSIs indicated that in such cases they ask their team leader to be given some leeway so that they can deal with the administrative work from previous cases and catch up with their backlog of work.

CSIs are usually well aware of the potential for mental and physical risks while conducting this type of work. CSIs therefore regularly consider whether they may be at risk themselves and what they can do to prevent this. In addition to avoiding specific CSs, they may also use other precautionary tactics. For example, CSIs may interrupt lengthy investigations to prevent physical problems, they wear face masks to reduce the smell, and those more than 55 years of age can make use of an arrangement whereby they are no longer required to be scheduled for stand-by shifts. Important resources at the individual level for this avoidance-focused coping strategy are self-reflection and assertiveness. CSIs need to be honest with themselves about the impact that the work has on them. They also need to stand up for themselves to make use of these measures. This is not always simple in practice because people are (a) inclined to be susceptible to group pressure, (b) wary of critical or derogatory comments, and (c) suffer from feelings of guilt if they request exemption from stand-by shifts due to the extra workload that this places on other team members, who need to take over these duties.

One organizational resource that helps CSIs reflect on the impact of this type of work is the support of a psychologist. The respondents indicated that they find it good to see an independent expert once a year (and whenever requested) to exchange thoughts about the nature of the work and the possible effects on their personal performance at work. There is a danger, as some have experienced personally, that after spending many years doing this work, they become nonchalant about the risks involved and fail to spot issues until it is too late. For this reason, the vigilance of colleagues and loved ones is also an invaluable resource. The signals that they provide can be an opportunity for reflection and taking precautionary measures where necessary.

Discussion

Previous research among CSIs has stated that the majority of criminal investigators are able to handle the impact of their work in a positive way, whereas a minority will develop symptoms (Hyman, 2004; Pavsic Mrevlje, 2016). This study has investigated the nature of that impact in greater depth and looked at factors promoting the mental resilience of CSIs. Compared to previous studies, this study has focused not only on the effects of working at potentially traumatic CSs but also at the influence of the entire context of the investigation process. Furthermore, long-term observational studies have been conducted involving five CSI teams in combination with 35 semistructured interviews with CSIs and team leaders. These unique aspects have enabled us to conduct a detailed evaluation of the relation between perceived stressors, coping strategies, and internal and external resources.

CSIs choose to do this job of their own volition, and this implies that they see the work as manageable. When staff leave, this happens primarily during the initial period, when new investigators find that the work is tougher than they had previously thought. This “natural” selection does not mean that forensic investigation work does not have a negative impact on the CSIs who continue in this field of work. Our study shows that CSIs, regardless of their level of experience, continue to be subject to a range of stressors at the CS and the associated work process (see Table 2). They learn ways of coping with these mental and physical stressors as they gain more experience. The deployment of five different coping strategies (see Table 3) enables them to continue functioning properly.

Our findings suggest that it is important for CSIs to (a) know how to use the identified coping strategies to deal with the different stressors, (b) know when to use which coping strategy, and (c) have the necessary resources available. Although the first two factors can be learned as more work experience is acquired, and are therefore controllable to some extent for the individual CSI, this does not apply to the same degree for the available resources. These are largely beyond the control of the individual and fall into the category of the team level, organizational level, or personal life. However, as was also found in the study of criminal investigators conducting child pornography investigations (Sollie et al., 2014), mental resilience is clearly determined not only by the individual capacities of criminal investigators and their ability to apply coping strategies but also by factors in their environment. This dependence on resources means that mental resilience among CSIs is not a static condition. Various CSIs have encountered that being resilient once does not mean that they will be resilient forever. These CSIs were confronted by situations in which they no longer had the resources required. Tensions in their personal life, a lack of support from colleagues, or inadequate resources can all mean that the preferred coping strategy cannot be used, leading to negative outcomes such as the need to stop work temporarily and the development of health issues.

The risk of reduced mental resilience among CSIs emerges as a result of the absence or the limited availability of resources due to (a) self-neglect (including lack of self-reflection, not defending one’s own interests, and not daring to reveal vulnerability); (b) team-working issues such as conflicts, disagreements over policy, and lack of autonomy; (c) organizational shortcomings regarding team formation, workplace, training, resources, and professional support; and (d) life events which can have a negative impact on the health of criminal investigators and their loved ones. One particular risk occurs when a resource changes into an organizational stressor (e.g., the support that is provided by a colleague disappears due to a conflict). Not only does the stress caused by operational stressors increase because a coping strategy disappears partially or completely (in this example, social support) but also the resource itself then becomes a source of stress. This dual role of team-level and organizational-level resources may explain why CSIs are more prone to issues caused by stress due to conflicts with colleagues and team leaders, bureaucratic procedures, limited resources, and too little training than they are to stress caused by the shocking CSs that they work at. A finding, moreover, that corresponds to other studies showing that organizational stressors are reliable predictors for the performance of police personnel (Dabney et al., 2013; Powell et al., 2013; Storch & Panzarella, 1996; Van der Velden et al., 2013; Wright et al., 2006).

Some of the coping strategies identified among CSIs are also employed by other criminal investigators and professionals who frequently work with murder victims (e.g., Alexander & Wells, 1991; McCarroll, Fullerton, Ursano, & Hermsen, 1996; McCarroll, Ursano, Wright, & Fullerton, 1993). Explorative studies with homicide detectives, vice, and digital investigators have also highlighted the value of social support, the attribution of meaning, and mental distancing techniques during stressful investigation work (Bourke & Craun, 2014; Burns, Morley, Bradshaw, & Domene, 2008; Dabney et al., 2013; Sollie et al., 2014; Wright et al., 2006). However, the avoidance-based and visualization-based coping strategies deployed by CSIs have not been identified in other investigative disciplines. It is possible that the arrangement of the workflow of CS investigations could explain this. CSIs are allocated work on the basis of incoming requests from other divisions, meaning that they are often aware of the nature of the CS before they arrive. This means that they are able to decide whether to attend that CS (avoidance) or not and also to prepare themselves mentally for what they may find there (visualization).

Furthermore, the use of humor was observed during our observational study and was also mentioned during the interviews. However, this was often in relation to just having fun rather than as a coping strategy. Our study indicates that humor can play a role in coping with potentially distressing work situations (see the section on emotional distancing), but in practice it seems to play a more minor role than indicated by research carried out by Kelty and Gordon (2015) and Vivona (2014). Humor is often inappropriate when working on CSs because of the presence of third parties (such as bereaved relatives or the media) or does not play a role because an investigator is working alone. Moreover, this study shows that humor can have dysfunctional effects on a CS, as it can be a source of irritation for other colleagues. For humor to make a positive contribution, it must be done with the appropriate degree of tact and discretion.

Limitations

This study has investigated the mental resilience of CSIs working in the Netherlands. Carrying out an observational study involving five CSI teams and 30 in-depth interviews with a sample of criminal investigators that was as diverse as possible means that it is unlikely (but not impossible) that “resilient coping strategies” and the associated resources employed by CSIs are missing from those that we have identified. However, one limitation of these applied research methods is that we cannot be certain how adequate the deployed coping strategies are and the extent to which health issues are caused by this type of investigative work. The data obtained may also be biased due to limited self-reflection or socially desirable behavior on the part of the CSIs involved in this study. See, for instance, Spano (2006, 2007) who examined reactivity in observational studies of the police. Although this risk cannot be ruled out, the respondents spoke to us on a voluntary basis about the negative impact of this type of investigation work and how they manage to (or do not manage to) cope successfully with potentially stressful or distressing situations. The fact that they were willing to share this type of personal information with the researcher contributed in a positive way to the reliability of the data presented here. Furthermore, a triangulation of methods was also used (checking the findings from the observational studies and interviews with team leaders and criminal investigators), and measurements were repeated (observations occurred on multiple occasions and the same CSIs were interviewed more than once).

In future research, it would be interesting to ascertain the actual effect of the various stress factors as well as the effect of the various coping strategies among CSIs. Biomedical instruments may form an important tool in this (see, for example, Adderley, Smith, Bond, & Smith, 2012). It would also be interesting to investigate in more depth the role of personality traits and factors outside the work context (such as life events) in relation to mental resilience of criminal investigators. The study by Kelty, Julian, and Robertson (2011) into the characteristics of “high-performing” CSIs provides a good starting point here.

Implications

CSIs in the Netherlands, as evidenced by this study, are generally able to cope with stressful work situations in a sustainable manner. Using a range of coping strategies, they are able to regulate stress so that they can continue to carry out their investigative work. However, to deploy these coping strategies, they are dependent on various resources at the level of the individual, team, and organization, as well as from their own personal lives. These resources are an essential factor in being able to continue their work as investigators over the long term, and they provide clues as to how the mental resilience of investigators could be supported or improved.

To reduce the risk of health problems and promote long-term sustainability, it would therefore be advisable for the police force, managers, and investigators to (continue to) invest in the various personal, team, and organization-related resources that promote the resilience of criminal investigators. To this end, we make six recommendations:

Let CSIs choose to do this work of their own volition, because self-assessment and -selection is a key factor in the experience of stress among CSIs. Therefore, refine the recruitment process of CSIs by organizing information meetings, professional assessments, and short-term internships. Moreover, develop a thorough introduction program. For example, designate mentors for new team members, educate them about the ability to acquire coping strategies, support unexperienced CSIs on their first CSs, and let them decide for themselves when they feel ready to work independently.

Facilitate autonomy during distressing cases, so that CSIs can manage their own workload and apply coping strategies of their own choosing.

Encourage and facilitate peer support by investing in psycho-education (i.e., information about stressors, coping, resources, and stress reactions) and dialog techniques with regard to discussing sensitive topics. It is also advisable to invest in the resources from investigators’ personal lives, by providing psycho-education to their partners, for example.

Continue to invest in adequate forensic resources and training; this is what gives CSIs the confidence to know that they are able to make the right decisions at the CS and can find personal meaning in their stressful work.

Facilitate professional support—set up regular meetings with an independent psychologist who is familiar with the work context. This offers CSIs an opportunity for reflection and taking precautionary measures where necessary.

Periodic monitoring of mental resilience. The mental resilience monitor developed by the Dutch National Police could be used for this purpose. Criminal investigators complete an assessment questionnaire, and the results are fed back to the superior at the team level (all the answers are anonymous and cannot be traced back to individuals). A digital dashboard displaying all the relevant factors “can help managers to understand the stress factors that are occurring and any resources that may be missing, enabling early intervention with regard to aspects that are not always on management’s radar” (Smit, Slagmolen, & Brepoels, 2016, p. 59). It would be advisable to refine this monitoring tool, which only has been validated for use in frontline police work, based on the knowledge gained about CSIs.

Conclusion

This study investigated the specific potential stressors in the work of CSIs and looked at factors promoting mental resilience of CSIs. To our knowledge, this is the first study in which long-term observational studies have been conducted involving different CSI teams in conjunction with a large number of interviews with CSIs and team leaders. The results show that mental resilience among CSIs is determined by a combination of individual capacities of criminal investigators, their ability to apply different coping strategies, and by environmental factors, particularly support structures. CSIs in this study all voluntarily choose after an intensive selection and internship process for this job, which is key for their resilience. Important coping strategies are sensemaking, self-regulation of situational demands, and visualizing of situations before entering the CS. Team work offering the option of task selection and job autonomy help in regulating specific stressors. This study adds to theories of mental resilience and offers tools for CSI policies as well as practices.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We thank the National Police of the Netherlands for their participation in our study. In particular, our deep gratitude to the crime scene investigators and team leaders in the five forensic teams for sharing their personal experiences in great depth with us. We also thank the anonymous reviewers and the journal’s editorial board for their insightful and stimulating comments on earlier drafts of this article.

Notes

Henk Sollie, PhD, recently received his doctorate at the University of Leuven, focusing on mental resilience of criminal investigators. This was a cooperation between KU Leuven, research group Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Professional Learning, and the Police Academy, in the Netherlands. He currently works as management consultant at Twynstra Gudde in Amersfoort, the Netherlands. His research interests include resilience in high-risk and high-stress work populations.

Nicolien Kop, PhD, is a lecturer of crime control and investigative science at the Police Academy of the Netherlands. She is leading research teams focusing on organized crime and on cooperation between police and citizens. Furthermore, she is responsible for technological innovation focused on crime control within the National Police of the Netherlands.

Martin C. Euwema is a full professor in organizational psychology at the University of Leuven, Belgium. He is chair of the research group Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Professional Learning and codirector of the Leuven Center for Collaborative Management. His main interests are conflict management and organizational leadership. He has extensive experience as consultant and mediator in many sectors.

References

Abdollahi

M. K.

(2002). Understanding police stress research. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 2(2), 1-24.

Adderley

Smith

L. L.

Bond

J. W.

Smith

(2012). Physiological measurement of crime scene investigator stress. International Journal of Police Science & Management, 14, 166-176.

Alexander

D. A.

Wells

(1991). Reactions of police officers to body-handling after a major disaster: A before-and-after comparison. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 159, 547-555.

Benight

C. C.

Bandura

(2004). Social cognitive theory of posttraumatic recovery: The role of perceived self-efficacy. Behavior Research and Therapy, 42, 1129-1148.

Blumer

(1954). What is wrong with social theory? American Sociological Review, 19, 3-10.

Bogaerts

(2013). Professional resilience of police personnel: A review. The Hague, The Netherlands: Research and Documentation Center (WODC).

Bonanno

G. A.

Mancini

A. D.

(2008). The human capacity to thrive in the face of potential trauma. Pediatrics, 121, 369-375.

Bourke

M. L.

Craun

S. W.

(2014). Secondary traumatic stress among Internet Crimes Against Children task force personnel: Impact, risk factors, and coping strategies. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 26, 586-609.

Bowen

G. A.

(2006). Grounded theory and sensitizing concepts. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(3), 1-9.

10.

Braun

Clarke

(2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77-101.

11.

Brown

Fielding

Grover

(1999). Distinguishing traumatic, vicarious and routine operational stressor exposure and attendant adverse consequences in a sample of police officers. Work & Stress, 13, 312-325.

12.

Brunetto

Teo

S. T.

Shacklock

Farr-Wharton

(2012). Emotional intelligence, job satisfaction, well-being and engagement: Explaining organizational commitment and turnover intentions in policing. Human Resource Management Journal, 22, 428-441.

13.

Burke

K. J.

Shakespeare-Finch

Paton

Ryan

(2006). Characterizing the resilient officer: Individual attributes at point of entry to policing. Traumatology, 12, 178-188.

14.

Burns

C. M.

Morley

Bradshaw

Domene

(2008). The emotional impact on and coping strategies employed by police teams investigating Internet child exploitation. Traumatology, 14, 20-31.

15.

Campbell

J. L.

Quincy

Osserman

Pedersen

O. K.

(2013). Coding in-depth semistructured interviews: Problems of unitization and intercoder reliability and agreement. Sociological Methods & Research, 42, 294-320.

16.

Carlier

I. V. E.

Lamberts

R. D.

Gersons

B. P. R.

(1997). Risk factors for posttraumatic stress symptomatology in police officers: A prospective analysis. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 185, 498-506.

17.

Chae

M. H.

Boyle

D. J.

(2013). Police suicide: Prevalence, risk, and protective factors. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 36, 91-118.

18.

Cuvelier

Heuskin

J. M.

Bourdoux

G. L.

(2008). Suicides in law enforcement agencies. Brussels, Belgium: Uitgeverij Politeia.

19.

Dabney

D. A.

Copes

Tewksbury

Hawk-Tourtelot

S. R.

(2013). A qualitative assessment of stress perceptions among members of a homicide unit. Justice Quarterly, 30, 811-836.

20.

Demerouti

Bakker

A. B.

Nachreiner

Schaufeli

W. B.

(2001). The job demands-resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 499-512.

21.

Evans

Pistrang

Billings

(2013). Police officers’ experiences of supportive and unsupportive social interactions following traumatic incidents. European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 4, 1-9.

22.

Folkman

Moskowitz

J. T.

(2004). Coping: Pitfalls and promise. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 745-774.

23.

Geertz

(1973). Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture. In Geertz

(Ed.), The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays (pp. 3-30), New York, NY: Basic Books.

24.

Gershon

R. R. M.

Barocas

Canton

A. N.

Vlahov

(2009). Mental, physical and behavioral outcomes associated with perceived work stress in police officers. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36, 275-289.

25.

Hodgins

G. A.

Creamer

Bell

(2001). Risk factors for post trauma reactions in police officers: A longitudinal study. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 189, 541-547.

26.

Hyman

(2004). Perceived social support and secondary traumatic stress symptoms in emergency responders. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 17, 149-156.

27.

Jenkins

S. R.

Baird

(2002). Secondary traumatic stress and vicarious trauma: A validational study. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 15, 423-432.

28.

Johnson

Cooper

Cartwright

Donald

Taylor

Millet

(2005). The experience of work-related stress across occupations. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20, 178-187.

29.

Kamphuis

Hart

M. H. E. ‘t.

Boermans

Venrooij

Van Wouwe

Binsch

(2012). Psychosocial determinants of mental resilience in the military. Soesterberg, The Netherlands: TNO (Organization for Applied Science).

30.

Kelty

S. F.

Gordon

(2015). No burnout at this coal-face: Managing occupational stress in forensic personnel and the implications for forensic and criminal justice agencies. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 22, 273-290.

31.

Kelty

S. F.

Julian

Robertson

(2011). Professionalism in crime scene examination: The seven key attributes of top crime scene examiners. Forensic Science Policy & Management: An International Journal, 2, 175-186.

32.

Kop

Euwema

M. C.

Schaufeli

(1999). Burnout, job stress and violent behavior among Dutch police officers. Work & Stress, 13, 326-340.

33.

Lazarus

R. S.

Folkman

(1984). Stress, appraisal and coping. New York, NY: Springer.

34.

Liberman

A. M.

Best

S. R.

Metzler

T. J.

Fagan

J. A.

Weiss

D. S.

Marmar

C. R.

(2002). Routine occupational stress and psychological distress in police. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 25, 421-439.

35.

Luthar

S. S.

Cicchetti

Becker

(2000). The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development, 71, 543-562.

36.

McCarroll

J. E.

Fullerton

C. S.

Ursano

R. J.

Hermsen

J. M.

(1996). Posttraumatic stress symptoms following forensic dental identification: Mt. Carmel, Waco, Texas. American Journal of Psychiatry, 1, 778-782.

37.

McCarroll

J. E.

Ursano

R. J.

Wright

K. M.

Fullerton

C. S.

(1993). Handling bodies after violent death: Strategies for coping. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 63, 209-214.

38.

McCoy

S. P.

Aamodt

M. G.

(2010). A comparison of law enforcement divorce rates with those of other occupations. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 25, 1-16.

39.

Mulhall

(2003). In the field: Notes on observation in qualitative research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 41, 306-313.

40.

Paton

Burke

Violanti

J. M.

Gehrke

(2009). Traumatic stress in police officers: A career-length assessment from recruitment to retirement. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

41.

Paton

Violanti

J. M.

Johnston

Burke

K. J.

Clarke

Keenan

(2008). Stress shield: A model of police resiliency. International Journal of Emergency Mental Health, 10, 95-108.

42.

Patton

(1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.

43.

Pavsic Mrevlje

. (2016). Coping with work-related traumatic situations among crime scene technicians. Stress & Health, 32, 374-382.

44.

Powell

M. B.

Guadagno

B. L.

Cassematis

(2013). Workplace stressors for investigative interviewers of child-abuse victims. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 36, 512-525.

45.

Powell

M. B.

Tomyn

A. J.

(2011). Life satisfaction amongst police officers working in the area of child abuse investigation. International Journal of Police Science & Management, 13, 187-194.

46.

Prati

Pietrantoni

(2010). Risk and resilience factors among Italian municipal police officers exposed to critical incidents. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 25, 27-33.

47.

Reich

J. W.

Zautra

A. J.

Hall

J. S.

(Eds.). (2010). Handbook of adult resilience. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

48.

Richardsen

A. M.

Burke

R. J.

Martinussen

(2006). Work and health outcomes among police officers: The mediating role of police cynicism and engagement. International Journal of Stress Management, 13, 555-574.

49.

Roberts

N. A.

Levenson

R. W.

(2001). The remains of the workday: Impact of job stress and exhaustion on marital interaction in police couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 1052-1067.

50.

Smit

Slagmolen

Brepoels

(2016). Resilience investigated (2010-2015): On human processes in police work. The Hague, The Netherlands: Eleven International.

51.

Sollie

Kop

Euwema

M. C.

(2014). Mental resilience of child pornography investigators: How police officers perceive and cope with the impact of child pornography investigations. Tijdschrift voor Criminologie, 56, 87-114.

52.

Spano

(2005). Potential sources of observer bias in police observational data. Social Science Research, 34, 591-617.

53.

Spano

(2006). Observer behavior as a potential source of reactivity: Describing and quantifying observer effects in a large-scale observational study of police. Sociological Methods & Research, 34, 521-553.

54.

Spano

(2007). How does reactivity affect police behavior? Describing and quantifying the impact of reactivity as behavioral change in a large-scale observational study of police. Journal of Criminal Justice, 35, 453-465.

55.

Storch

J. E.

Panzarella

(1996). Police stress: State-trait anxiety in relation to occupational and personal stressors. Journal of Criminal Justice, 24, 99-107.

56.

Tedeschi

R. G.

Calhoun

L. G.

(2004). Posttraumatic growth: Conceptual foundations and empirical evidence. Psychological Inquiry, 15, 1-18.

57.

Van Beek

Taris

T. W.

Schaufeli

W. B

. (2013). Psychosocial wellbeing of police personnel. The Hague, The Netherlands: Research and Documentation Center (WODC).

58.

Van der Velden

P. G.

Rademaker

A. R.

Vermetten

Portengen

M. A.

Yzermans

J. C.

Grievink

. (2013). Police officers: A high risk group for the development of mental health disturbances? A cohort study. BMJ Open, 3(1), 1-9.

59.

Vivona

B. D.

(2014). Humor functions within crime scene investigations: Group dynamics, stress, and the negotiation of emotions. Police Quarterly, 17, 127-149.

60.

Waters

J. A.

Ussery

(2007). Police stress: History, contributing factors, symptoms, and interventions. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 30, 169-188.

61.

Webster

J. H.

(2013). Police officer perceptions of occupational stress: The state of the art. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 36, 636-652.

62.

Wright

Powell

M. B.

Ridge

(2006). Child abuse investigation: An in-depth analysis of how police officers perceive and cope with daily work challenges. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 29, 498-512.