International Research Journal of Innovations in Engineering and Technology - IRJIET International Open Access, Monthly, Peer Reviewed, Reputed Journal ISSN (online): 2581-3048

Impact Factor (2025): 6.9

DOI Prefix: 10.47001/IRJIET

Exploring a Social Learning Perspective on Computer Forensics Barriers and Factors Affecting Cybercrime Investigation in Kenya

Abstract

As Kenya matures into an information society, she is exposed to various cyber threats and challenges resulting from the ubiquity of the internet and advancement of technology. Social engineering tricks have been applied to exploit vulnerabilities in people, processes and technologies used in varied environments. On the other hand, computer forensics development plays catch up with the rising challenges within the field especially on the levels of expertise. Social learning brings the element of gaining cultural knowledge, skills, attitudes, strategies, rules and beliefs through observing others. To determine the need for a proactive means of overcoming the ever challenging cybercrime, a Social Learning perspective into the development of standardized procedures in legislation, investigation processes, certification and training of cybercrime investigators is explored, so computer forensics can become a more effective and mature field in curbing cybercrime investigation barriers, especially in predicting and understanding of cybercriminals’ behavior.

Country : Kenya

1 Josephine Akinyi Odoyo2 Silvance Abeka3 Samuel Liyala

  1. Department of Information Systems, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga University of Science & Technology, Bondo, Kenya
  2. Department of Information Systems, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga University of Science & Technology, Bondo, Kenya
  3. Department of Information Systems, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga University of Science & Technology, Bondo, Kenya

IRJIET, Volume 4, Issue 7, July 2020 pp. 9-13

doi.org/10.47001/IRJIET/2020.407002

Full Paper
Download

References

  1. Wall, D.S. (2005/15).The Internet as a Conduit for Criminals’ pp. 77-98 in Pattavina, A. (ed) Information Technology and the Criminal Justice System, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  2. Jaishankar, K. (2008). Space Transition Theory of cyber crimes. In Schmallager, F., & Pittaro, M. (Eds.), Crimes of the Internet. (pp.283-301) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  3. Sremack, J. C. (2007). The Gap between Theory and Practice in Digital Forensics. LECG Washington
  4. Huebner, E., Bem, D., &Bem, O. (2007). Computer Forensics – Past, Present and Future.
  5. Whitcomb, C. M. (2002). An Historical Perspective of Digital Evidence: A Forensic Scientist’s                 View. International Journal of Digital Evidence, Volume 1, Issue 1.
  6. Juan, C. Rivera-Vazquez, Lilian, V., Ortiz-Fournier Feliz Rogelio Flores, (2009), Overcoming cultural barriers for innovation and knowledge sharing”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 13 Iss 5 pp. 257-270.
  7. Hewling, M.O. (2013), ‘Digital forensics: an integrated approach for the investigation of cyber/computer related crimes’. PhD thesis. University of Bedfordshire.
  8. Lalla, Himal & Flowerday, Stephen. (2010). ‘Towards a Standardized Digital Forensic Process: E-mail Forensics’.
  9. Police Executive Research Forum. (2014). ‘The Role of Local Law Enforcement Agencies In Preventing and Investigating Cybercrime’. Washington, D.C. 20036.
  10. Wanderi, C. (2007). Computer forensics-Kenya needs a law to protect businesses against cyber/computer crime. Retrieved on 17th May 2015: http://thekenyancolumn.blogspot.com/2007/09/computer-forensic-kenya-needs-law-to.html.
  11. Kohn, M., Eloff J., and Olivier M. (2006). “Framework for a Digital Forensic Investigation.” http://icsa.cs.up.ac.za/issa/2006/Proceedings/Full/101_Paper.pdf
  12. Bandura, A. (1989). Social Cognitive Theory. http://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Bandura/Bandura1989ACD.pdf
  13. Humes, G. (2001). Social Cognitive Theory of Learning. http://info.psu.edu.sa/psu/maths/007%20Social%20Cog%20Theory%2001.pdf
  14. Singh, R. and Raja, S. (2010). Convergence in information and communication technology: Strategic and regulatory considerations, The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank; Washington.
  15. Akers, Ronald L. 2000. Criminological Theories: Introduction, Evaluation and Application. Los Angeles: Roxbury.
  16. Collins, S. E., & Carey K. B., The theory of planned behavior as a model of heavy episodic drinking among college students. Psychology of addictive behaviours : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors, 21(4): 498-5-7. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-164X.21.4.498
  17. McLeod, S. A. (2015). Skinner - Operant Conditioning. www.simplypsychology.org/operant-conditioning.html
  18. Skinner, B. F. (2014). Science and Human Behavior. The  B. F. Skinner Foundation.
  19. Boeree, C.G. (2006). ‘Personality Theories’. http://www.ship.edu/%7Ecgboeree/perscontents.html
  20. Deborah E Altus, Edward K Morris. ‘B.F.Skinner’s Utopian Vision: Behind and Beyond Walden Two’. Behav Anal. 2009 Fall; 32(2): 319-335.doi: 10.1007/BF03392195.
  21. Matsueda, R. L. (2006). Differential Social Organization, Collective Action, and Crime. (Springer Science and Business Media). University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
  22. Matsueda, R. L. (2000). Differential Association Theory. University of Washington, Seattle, WA
  23. Huebner, E., Bem, D., &Bem, O. (2007). ‘Computer Forensics – Past, Present and Future’. Journal of Information Science and Technology.

Copyright @ 2026-2017 IRJIET. All Right Reserved.

Developed by Byzero Technologies