Running Head: THE CSI EFFECT: AN OVERVIEW OF THE RESEARCH ARTICLE BY JOHN

ALLDREDGE ON THE PHENOMENON.

THE CSI EFFECT: AN OVERVIEW OF THE RESEARCH PAPER BY JOHN

ALLDREDGE, ON THE PHENOMENON.1

By:

SUBJECT
AFFILIATION
DATED

1Alldredge, John (2015) "The "CSI Effect" and Its Potential Impact on Juror Decisions,"
Themis: Research Journal of Justice Studies and Forensic Science: 3(1), Article 6. San Jose
State University. Retrievable from http://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/themis/vol3/iss1/6/

2
THE CSI EFFECT: AN OVERVIEW OF THE RESEARCH ARTICLE BY JOHN ALLDREDGE ON
THE PHENOMENON.

Introduction
CSI (or Crime Scene Investigation) be it Miami, Las Vegas or New York, is at present the
most popular Television show in the United States. Each episode has a common link but is also
stand-alone. The episodes start with a crime and by the end, the good guys, (the cops here), end
up solving the crime, with the use of forensics and some old common sense. The plots are well
written, the editing is slick and the one-liners are all good, all of which has contributed to the
shows appeal and popularity. CSI is more than just a trio of hit shows, however. Its a way of
life says Donn Cortez as he proclaims himself as a CSI Geek. (2006, pp. 3)
On CSI
How can CSI effect be defined in the context of the article? The CSI effect can be
defined as the phenomenon of subconscious generation of bias in jurors minds against the
evidence produced by the prosecutor if the evidence is not forensic but mainly circumstantial.
The reason for this, being the daily doses of CSI or similar crime shows on television seen by
potential jurors, where the crime is solved mainly by forensic technology. As can be concluded,
such a situation is definitely not desired as collection of forensic evidence and presenting the
same in court, may not be possible in all cases. The television show is fiction, after all, and it
makes no claim to be an educative cum entertainment show either. It is just Hollywood Bang,
Bang. .Tomato Ketchup story
A CSI effect is not Hollywood and is serious stuff. It can result in someone guilty being
let off free (or someone innocent being convicted). Another problem is that the prosecution asks
for various tests to be done which are not necessary, just to have a forensic evidence record

3
THE CSI EFFECT: AN OVERVIEW OF THE RESEARCH ARTICLE BY JOHN ALLDREDGE ON
THE PHENOMENON.

while the defense produces as witnesses eminent experts who waste time discussing matters of
no legal relevance to the case.
Research questions
There are two Research questions in the article, which are as follows:
1. Does the CSI effect really exist or, Is a pro-forensic evidence bias generated subconsciously among potential jurors?
2. If the CSI effect is not fiction, than what steps should be taken so that innocents do not
suffer from the bias it generates (albeit subconsciously) among potential jurors?
Research Methods and Findings
Alldredge did not carry out any research with the help of population samples (which
appears to be the only way to determine correlations if any. Instead, he did a kind of metaanalysis. As the paper is relatively new, Alldredges meta-analysis proves more revealing than an
independent measurement. In 2011, Hayes-Smith & Levitt, researched with 104 people from the
south (Male 51 and Female 53). These people were asked bout their Television watching habits
as well as about written, legal trial, case studies where they were asked to respond to. The results
found some pro-support bias. Hayes-Smith & Levett also carried out another series of tests
where they first queried whether the people being tested knew about the CSI effect and if so,
what they did to ensure that it would not influence their decisions. Only 30% odd came out as
knowing what CSI effect was. They said that they were always on the watch so that their
decisions were not influenced in any way. This suggested that education about this phenomenon
might be a way to overcome it.
My Opinion on the Implications of the findings.

4
THE CSI EFFECT: AN OVERVIEW OF THE RESEARCH ARTICLE BY JOHN ALLDREDGE ON
THE PHENOMENON.

I feel that the findings are a bit akin to a non-sequitur. The small bias which is being
generated subconsciously is an emotion really too small to identify, forget measurement. Can
it be just someones imagination? It can very well be and if one considers the fact that the bias
builds up subconsciously, the idea of the bias becomes even hazier. Secondly, though HayesSmith & Levitts findings were replicated by a number of researchers, Wise (2010), Shelton,
Kim & Barak (2009), etc. another lot of researchers found no evidence of any bias and
concluded that the effect Media Creation . Dr. Kimberlianne Podlas (2006), etc. However,
one thing is clear that this subject does not deserve so much attention. Alldredge has given us
two ways by which we can try to kill any pending bias. By educating through multi-media and
segregating from the jurors lists, are his suggestions. I feel this two combined together will
make good sense in the long run.
************
NB: Of the number of articles available, this article was chosen for the analysis since it was the
most recent, and also because of its meta-analytic form.

5
THE CSI EFFECT: AN OVERVIEW OF THE RESEARCH ARTICLE BY JOHN ALLDREDGE ON
THE PHENOMENON.

REFERENCES:
Alldridge, J (2015). The "CSI Effect" and Its Potential Impact on Juror Decisions, Themis:
Research Journal of Justice Studies and Forensic Science: 3(1), Article 6. San Jose State
University. Retrievable from http://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/themis/vol3/iss1/6/

Cortez, D. (2006). Investigating CSI : An Unauthorized Look Inside the Crime Labs of Las
Vegas, Miami and New York. Dallas, TX, USA: BenBella Books. Retrieved from
http://www.ebrary.com

Hayes-Smith, R. M. & Levett, L. M. (2011). Jurys still out: How television and crime show
viewing influences jurors evaluations of evidence . Applied Psychology in Criminal
Justice, 7(1), 29-46.