The CSI effect and its controversial existence and impact: a mixed methods review

Abstract

The CSI effect has caused controversy in and outside of the courtroom since the advent of the television show CSI: Crime Scene Investigation as it has popularly been believed to affect how jurors decide verdicts in court cases. However, throughout the literature on the CSI effect, there is a discrepancy on whether or not it actually exists. A meta-analysis and qualitative overview were conducted to review the impact of watching crime drama television shows on jurors’ verdict decisions and expectations for the presence of forensic evidence at trial, and thereby determine if the CSI effect did indeed exist, and, if so, to what extent. The qualitative overview indicated that most articles claim that jurors’ expectations are influenced by the CSI effect, and that discussion of other aspects of the CSI effect varies by the type of article being written. The meta-analysis revealed preliminary evidence that watching CSI-type shows had a small impact on both jurors’ verdicts and expectations. Finally, while these results contribute to settling the disparity between the ‘perceived’ CSI effect and the ‘actual’ CSI effect, more research needs to be conducted in order to fully determine the existence and corresponding impact of the CSI effect.