The CSI Effect Reconsidered: Is It Moderated by Need for Cognition?

The CBS-network crime fiction television series CSI: Crime Scene Investigation ranks among the most popular programs in the world and is one of the most watched scripted programs on television, gathering over 73.8 million viewers worldwide in 2009 (Gorman, 2010) with its reruns aired in over 200 territories (Rice, 2009). Furthermore, CBS closed the 2009-2010 season as the most-watched television network in the United States for the seventh time in eight years, attributed to CSI and its spin-offs and clone programs CSI: Miami, CSI: New York, NCIS: Naval Criminal Investigative Service, NCIS: Los Angeles, and Criminal Minds (Rice, 2010). Other television networks have followed suit, releasing similar programs such as NBC's Crossing Jordan, TNT's The Closer, and Fox's Bones (Cole & Dioso-Villa, 2007). In these fictional programs, sexy, charismatic, and highly astute crime scene investigators recover covert evidence from the crime scene, analyze the evidence with exceedingly sophisticated scientific testing procedures (often to the beat of a stylish soundtrack), make absolute conclusions about the perpetrator's identity and involvement in the crime, and often extract a confession from the perpetrator, all within an hour. However, much of the forensic science procedure depicted in these fictional programs is unrealistic and idealized, and in fact has been described by forensic science experts as "wishful thinking" (Kruse, 2010) or even nonexistent (Podlas, 2009; Schweitzer & Saks, 2007). To make matters more confusing, other documentary-style forensic science programs have proliferated as well, depicting criminal investigative procedures with actual cases, such as CBS's 48 Hours Mystery, AE Toobin, 2007). Cole and Dioso-Villa (2007, 2009) have outlined eight different subtypes of the Effect, the most troubling of which is the "strong prosecutor's effect" due to its potential to interfere most severely with the criminal justice system. In this subtype, heavy forensic science fiction-viewing jurors in real criminal trials hold unrealistically high expectations for the availability and reliability of pro-prosecution scientific evidence presented in court, and when these expectations are not met, they are more likely to acquit the defendant based upon reasonable doubt of guilt. Since CSI's debut in 2000, numerous professionals within the criminal justice system have expressed a deep-seated belief in the existence of the Effect. For example, in a survey study of 36 police officers and 127 forensic investigators, Stinson, Patry, and Smith (2007) found that the vast majority believed that forensic science television programs have influenced the public's perception of police work and investigations, court processes, and the legal system overall. As another example, Stevens' (2008) survey study of 444 prosecutors across the United States outlines several anecdotes suggesting that jurors are more heavily influenced by depictions of scientific evidence presented in forensic television programming than they are by evidence actually presented in court. Intense speculation about the existence of the CSI Effect has led to a call for action among prosecutors, judges, forensic scientists and investigators, and even jurors themselves. …