In Digital Forensics, person-hours spent on investigation is a key factor which needs to be kept to a minimum whilst also paying close attention to the authenticity of the evidence. The literature describes challenges behind increasing person-hours and identifies several factors which contribute to this phenomenon. This paper reviews these factors and demonstrates that they do not wholly account for increases in investigation time. Using real case records from the Dubai Police, an extensive study explains the contribution of other factors to the increase in person-hours. We conclude this work by emphasizing on several factors affecting the person-hours in contrast to what most of the literature in this area proposes.

The present study aimed to support the psychometric adequacy of the Flourishing Scale in the Brazilian context. It counted with a non-probabilistic sample of 171 undergraduate students (Study 1) and 177 individuals from the general population (Study 2). Participants answered to the Flourishing Scale, the Positivity Scale, and demographic questions. The studies showed a one-factor solution, with satisfactory internal consistency, providing empirical evidence of convergent validity through the average variance extracted and showing positive correlation with the construct of positivity. Furthermore, a confirmatory factor analysis (ML) corroborated the recommended one-factor model. This measure demonstrated to be psychometrically suitable for use in the Brazilian context. Thus, this study provided a brief and low-cost measure of well-being from the perspective of flourishing, being adequate to be used in the research field.

A number of theories of psi such as Stanford’s psi-mediated instrumental response (PMIR) model suggest psi can function without a person’s awareness, and that their intent to exhibit psi may be counterproductive. However, few parapsychological studies have directly compared participants’ performance at intentional and nonintentional versions of equivalent tasks. This study sought to address this issue whilst exploring the role of lability, suggested by Stanford to be predictive of a person’s propensity to respond to extrasensory stimuli. 50 participants took part in both intentional and nonintentional versions of a 10-trial, binary, forced-choice precognition task. A contingent outcome task system involving positive pictures as reward for hit trials and negative pictures as punishment for miss trials was administered on a trial-by-trial basis. Participants scored marginally fewer hits than the mean chance expectation in both versions of the task, with no tangible difference in their performance between tasks. Furthermore, no relationship was found between the number of precognitive hits they achieved and their scores on a composite psychometric measure of lability, nor its constituent elements. However, participants’ expectations that their luck could aid their performance, as well as their emotional reactivity, were significantly positively related to their tacit psi scores.