| The present study assessed the impact of the CSI effect on the rulings of judges as compared to verdicts issued by juries. The CSI effect is the notion that watching television crime dramas, such as CSI, skews the public's perception of forensic science and distorts their expectations of the criminal justice system (Stinson, Patry, & Smith, 2007). In bench trials, judges affect the outcome of the trial and rule on the admissibility of evidence. Judges may perceive jurors as having unrealistic expectations of forensic evidence and address the problem by altering their decision making process. Participants in the study were randomly assigned to the judges' role where they received information about the CSI effect, whereas those as jurors only received the facts of the case and the arguments made by the defense and the prosecution. It was hypothesized that the CSI effect would have no impact on the students acting as judges based upon their familiarity with the legal system and their knowledge of the media's role in influencing jurors. Students acting as jurors would be more susceptible to media influences because of their lack of familiarity with the legal system and research on the CSI effect. The findings suggest that the trier of fact, television viewing habits, and perceptions of the legal system were not significant in predicting the outcome of the case. The limitations of this study and suggested future research were also considered and addressed. |
