A surfeit of science: The "CSI effect" and the media appropriation of the public understanding of science.

Over the past decade, popular media has promulgated claims that the television program CSI and its spinoffs and imitators have had a pernicious effect on the public understanding of forensic science, the so-called "CSI effect." This paper analyzes those media claims by documenting the ways in which the media claims that CSI "distorts" an imagined "reality." It shows that the media appropriated the analytic stance usually adopted by science advocates, portraying the CSI effect as a social problem in science communication. This appropriation was idiosyncratic in that it posited, as a social problem, a "surfeit" of knowledge and positive imagery about science, rather than the more familiar "deficits." In addition, the media simultaneously appropriated both "traditional" and "critical" PUS discourses. Despite this apparent contradiction, the paper concludes that, in both discourses, the media and its expert informants insist upon their hegemony over "the public" to articulate the "reality" of forensic science.

The importance of forensic evidence for decisions on criminal guilt.

Recent studies have found that the general public perceives forensic evidence to be relatively inaccurate and to involve high levels of human judgement. This study examines how important the general public finds forensic evidence by comparing decisions on guilt and punishment in criminal cases that involve forensic versus eyewitness testimony evidence and examining whether a CSI effect exists. Specifically, this experimental survey study utilized a 2 (crime type: murder or rape) × 4 (evidence type: DNA, fingerprint, victim eyewitness testimony, or bystander eyewitness testimony) - 1 (no victim testimony for murder scenario) design, yielding seven vignettes scenarios to which participants were randomly assigned. Results indicate that forensic evidence was associated with more guilty verdicts and higher confidence in a guilty verdict. Forensic evidence did not change the expected sentence length and did not generally affect the ideal sentence length. However, for rape, respondents believed that the defendant should receive a longer sentence when forensic evidence was presented but forensic evidence did not alter likely sentence that respondents expected the defendant to receive. The results of this study did not support a CSI effect. Overall, this study suggests that forensic evidence - particularly DNA - has a stronger influence during the verdict stage than the sentencing stage.

Public beliefs about the accuracy and importance of forensic evidence in the United States.

Recent advances in forensic science, especially the use of DNA technology, have revealed that faulty forensic analyses may have contributed to miscarriages of justice. In this study we build on recent research on the general public's perceptions of the accuracy of 10 forensic science techniques and of each stage in the investigation process. We find that individuals in the United States hold a pessimistic view of the forensic science investigation process, believing that an error can occur about half of the time at each stage of the process. We find that respondents believe that forensics are far from perfect, with accuracy rates ranging from a low of 55% for voice analysis to a high of 83% for DNA analysis, with most techniques being considered between 65% and 75% accurate. Nevertheless, respondents still believe that forensic evidence is a key part of a criminal case, with nearly 30% of respondents believing that the absence of forensic evidence is sufficient for a prosecutor to drop the case and nearly 40% believing that the presence of forensic evidence - even if other forms of evidence suggest that the defendant is not guilty - is enough to convict the defendant.

The CSI effect on cold case investigations.

Much has been made about the potential impact of fictional crime scene shows in the media on jury verdicts. However, there has been little discussion about how those programs, and the myriad of other true crime shows and documentaries may otherwise influence the actual investigative process. The intent of this paper is to discuss ways that such shows may impact the investigative process. The focus will be on the investigation of old, unsolved cases, commonly referred to as cold cases, because of the increasing focus on forensics in all aspects of the investigation and the number of television shows that feature such cases. This paper is not intended to be an academic study of the issue, as it relies much on anecdotal evidence and the experience of the author and others. The purpose is to hopefully generate further discussion and research with the goal of improving the investigative process.

Beliefs about error rates and human judgment in forensic science.

Forensic science techniques are often used in criminal trials to infer the identity of the perpetrator of crime and jurors often find this evidence very persuasive. Unfortunately, two of the leading causes of wrongful convictions are forensic science testing errors and false or misleading forensic testimony (Saks and Koehler, 2005). Therefore, it is important to understand jurors' pre-existing beliefs about forensic science, as these beliefs may impact how they evaluate forensic evidence in the courtroom. In this study, we examine people's perceptions of the likelihood of error and human judgment involved at each stage of the forensic science process (i.e., collection, storage, testing, analysis, reporting, and presenting). In addition, we examine people's perceptions of the accuracy of - and human judgment involved in - 16 different forensic techniques. We find that, in contrast to what would be expected by the CSI effect literature, participants believed that the process of forensic science involved considerable human judgment and was relatively error-prone. In addition, participants had wide-ranging beliefs about the accuracy of various forensic techniques, ranging from 65.18% (document analysis) up to 89.95% (DNA). For some forensic techniques, estimates were lower than that found in experimental proficiency studies, suggesting that our participants are more skeptical of certain forensic evidence than they need to be.

It's Not the CSI Effect: Criminal Justice Students' Choice of Major and Career Goals.

The media tends to influence public perceptions of the criminal justice system. The media's impact, known as the CSI Effect, is not well documented in criminal justice majors. The present study adds to a small body of literature regarding the impact of media on criminal justice students' decisions, and seeks to identify the factors that influence students' choices, regarding their major/career goals. Based on the results from surveys administered at an urban university in the United States, most criminal justice students reported that they were not influenced by the media, yet the vast majority believed this to be true of their fellow majors. These students chose criminal justice because they found the subject matter interesting and relevant to the real world, and they wanted to work in a field in which they could be a problem solver. Upon graduation, these students overwhelmingly reported an interest in pursuing a career in federal law enforcement. Unfortunately, corrections, a field dedicated to working with offenders, was the lowest preferred profession among criminal justice students.