Investigating CSI : Portrayals of DNA testing on a forensic crime show and their potential effects

Abstract

The popularity of forensic crime shows such as CSI has fueled debate about their potential social impact. This study considers CSI’s potential effects on public understandings regarding DNA testing in the context of judicial processes, the policy debates surrounding crime laboratory procedures, and the forensic science profession, as well as an effect not discussed in previous accounts: namely, the show’s potential impact on public understandings of DNA and genetics more generally. To develop a theoretical foundation for research on the “CSI effect,” it draws on cultivation theory, social cognitive theory, and audience reception studies. It then uses content analysis and textual analysis to illuminate how the show depicts DNA testing. The results demonstrate that CSI tends to depict DNA testing as routine, swift, useful, and reliable and that it echoes broader discourses about genetics. At times, however, the show suggests more complex ways of thinking about DNA testing and genetics.

Keywords

content analysis DNA testing entertainment television forensic science genetics

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allen

, ed. (2007) Reading CSI: Crime TV under the Microscope. London: I.B. Tauris.

Bandura

(1986) Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bates

B. R.

(2005) “Public Culture and Public Understanding of Genetics: A Focus Group Study,” Public Understanding of Science 14(1): 47–65.

Besley

J. C.

Shanahan

(2005) “Media Attention and Exposure in Relation to Support for Agricultural Biotechnology,” Science Communication 26(4): 347–67.

Brewer

P. R.

Ley

B. L.

(2010) “Media Use and Public Perceptions of DNA Evidence,” Science Communication 32(1): 93–117.

Busselle

R. W.

(2001) “Television Exposure, Perceived Realism, and Exemplar Accessibility in the Social Judgment Process,” Media Psychology 3(1): 43–67.

Cavender

Deutsch

S. K.

(2007) “CSI and Moral Authority: The Police and Science,” Crime, Media, Culture 3(1): 67–81.

Chory-Assad

R. M.

Tamborini

(2001) “Television Doctors: An Analysis of Physicians in Fictional and Non-Fictional Television Programs,” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 45(3): 499–521.

Cole

S. A.

(2001) Suspect Identities: A History of Fingerprinting and Criminal Identification. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

10.

Cole

S. A.

Dioso-Villa

(2007) “CSI and its Effects: Media, Juries, and the Burden of Proof,” New England Law Review 41(3): 435–69.

11.

Cole

S. A.

Dioso-Villa

(2008) “Investigating the ‘CSI Effect’ Effect: Media and Litigation Crisis in Criminal Law,” Stanford Law Review 61(6): 1335–73.

12.

Cole-Turner

(1999) “Faith Meets the Human Genome Project: Religious Factors in the Public Response to Genetics,” Public Understanding of Science 8(3): 207–14.

13.

Condit

C. M.

(1999) “How the Public Understands Genetics: Non-Deterministic and Non-Discriminatory Interpretations of the ‘Blueprint’ Metaphor,” Public Understanding of Science 8(3): 169–80.

14.

Condit

C. M.

Ferguson

Kassel

Thadani

(2001) “An Exploratory Study of the Impact of News Headlines on Genetic Determinism,” Science Communication 22(4): 379–95.

15.

Connors

Lundregan

Miller

McEwan

(1996) Convicted by Juries, Exonerated by Science: Case Studies in the Use of DNA Evidence to Establish Innocence after Trial. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.

16.

Crime Control Digest (2004) “Kansas Cuts DNA Processing Time by Half, Pushes Cold Hits to New High,” 10 December. URL (consulted 22 July 2009): http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa4440/is_200412/ai_n16061629

17.

Dale

W. M.

Greenspan

Orokos

(2006) DNA Forensics: Expanding Uses and Information Sharing. Sacramento, CA: SEARCH, The National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics.

18.

Dean-Ruzicka

(2009) “Vengeance, Healing, and Justice: Post 9/11 through the Lens of CSI,” Quarterly Review of Film and Video 26(2): 118–30.

19.

Diem

S. J.

Lantos

J. D.

Tulsky

J. A.

(1996) “Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation on Television: Miracles and Misinformation,” New England Journal of Medicine 334(24): 1578–82.

20.

Duster

(2006) “Explaining Differential Trust of DNA Forensic Technology: Grounded Assessment or Inexplicable Paranoia?,” Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics 34(2): 293–300.

21.

Franklin

McKinnon

, eds (2001) Relative Values: Reconfiguring Kinship Studies. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

22.

Gever

(2005) “The Spectacle of Crime, Digitized: CSI: Crime Science Investigation and Social Anatomy,” European Journal of Cultural Studies 8(4): 445–63.

23.

Gordon

P. N.

Williamson

Lawler

P. G.

(1998) “As Seen on TV: Observational Study of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in British Television Medical Dramas,” British Medical Journal 317: 780–3.

24.

Greenberg

B. S.

(1988) “Some Uncommon Television Images and the Drench Hypothesis,” in Oskamp

(ed.) Television as a Social Issue, pp. 88–102. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

25.

Heller

Escobar

(2003) “From Pure Genes to GMOs: Transnationalized Gene Landscapes in the Biodiversity and Transgenic Food Networks,” in Goodman

A. H.

Heath

Lindee

M. S.

(eds) Genetic Nature/Culture: Anthropology and Science beyond the Two-Culture Divide, pp. 155–76. Berkeley: University of California Press.

26.

S. S.

Brossard

Scheufele

D. A.

(2008) “Effects of Value Predispositions, Mass Media Use, and Knowledge on Public Attitudes toward Embryonic Stem Cell Research,” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 20(2): 171–92.

27.

Holliman

(2004) “Media Coverage of Cloning: A Study of Media Content, Production, and Reception,” Public Understanding of Science 13(2): 107–30.

28.

Houck

M. M.

(2006) “CSI: Reality,” Scientific American 295(1): 84–9.

29.

Hubbard

Wald

(1993) Exploding the Gene Myth: How Genetics Information is Produced and Manipulated by Scientists, Physicians, Employers, Insurance Companies, Educators, and Law Enforcers. Boston: Beacon Press.

30.

Jackson

(1999) “African-American Responses to the Human Genome Project,” Public Understanding of Science 8(3): 181–91.

31.

Kirby

D. A.

(2003a) “Science Consultants, Fictional Films, and Scientific Practice,” Social Studies of Science 33(2): 231–68.

32.

Kirby

D. A.

(2003b) “Scientists on the Set: Science Consultants and the Communication of Science in Visual Fiction,” Public Understanding of Science 12(3): 261–78.

33.

Kitzinger

(1999) “A Sociology of Media Power: Key Issues in Audience Reception Research,” in Philo

(ed.) Message Received, pp. 3–20. Harlow: Longman.

34.

Kloppenburg

J. R.

Jr. (2005) First the Seed: The Political Economy of Plant Biotechnology. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.

35.

Lee

(2007) “The CSI Effect: TV’s Impact on the Future of Forensic Science,” The Triple Helix Issue 7 (Michaelmas): 22–3.

36.

Long

Steinke

(1996) “The Thrill of Everyday Science: Images of Science and Scientists on Children’s Educational Science Programmes in the United States,” Public Understanding of Science 5(2): 101–19.

37.

Long

Boiarsky

Thayer

(2001) “Gender and Racial Counter-Stereotypes in Science Education Television: A Content Analysis,” Public Understanding of Science 10(3): 255–69.

38.

Lovgren

(2004) “‘CSI Effect’ is Mixed Blessing for Real Crime Labs,” National Geographic News 23 September. URL (consulted 22 July 2009): http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/09/0923_040923_csi.html

39.

Lury

(2007) “CSI and Sound,” in Allen

(ed.) Reading CSI: Crime TV under the Microscope, pp. 107–21. London: I.B. Tauris.

40.

Lynch

McNally

(2003) “‘Science,’ ‘Common Sense,’ and DNA Evidence: A Legal Controversy about the Public Understanding of Science,” Public Understanding of Science 12(1): 83–103.

41.

Mulla

(2008) “There is No Place Like Home: The Body as the Scene of the Crime in Sexual Assault Intervention,” Home Cultures 5(3): 301–25.

42.

Nelkin

(1995) Selling Science: How the Press Covers Science and Technology. New York: W.H. Freeman.

43.

Nelkin

Lindee

M. S.

(1996) The DNA Mystique: The Gene as a Cultural Icon. New York: W.H. Freeman.

44.

Nisbet

(2005) “The Competition for Worldviews: Values, Information, and Public Support for Stem Cell Research,” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 17(1): 90–112.

45.

O’Connor

M. M.

(1998) “The Role of the Television Drama ER in Medical Student Life: Entertainment or Socialization?,” Journal of the American Medical Association 280: 854–5.

46.

Pfau

Mullen

L. J.

Deidrich

Garrow

(1995) “Television Viewing and Public Perceptions of Attorneys,” Human Communication Research 21(3): 307–30.

47.

Podlas

(2006) “‘The CSI Effect’: Exposing the Media Myth,” Fordham Intellectual Property, Media, and Entertainment Law Journal 16: 429–65.

48.

Pratt

T. C.

Gaffney

M. J.

Lovrich

N. P.

Johnson

C. L.

(2006) “This isn’t CSI: Estimating the National Backlog of Forensic DNA Cases and the Barriers Associated with Case Processing,” Criminal Justice Policy Review 17(1): 32–47.

49.

Rapp

(2000) Testing Women, Testing the Fetus: The Social Impact of Amniocentesis in America. New York: Routledge.

50.

Roane

(2005) “The CSI Effect,” U.S. News and World Report 138(15): 48–54.

51.

Rose

(2006) The Politics of Life Itself: Biomedicine, Power, and Subjectivity in the Twenty-First Century. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

52.

Scheck

Neufeld

Dwyer

(2001) Actual Innocence: When Justice Goes Wrong and How to Make it Right. New York: Signet.

53.

Schweitzer

N. J.

Saks

M. S.

(2007) “The CSI Effect: Popular Fiction about Forensic Science Affects the Public’s Expectations about Real Forensic Science,” Jurimetrics 47: 357–64.

54.

Segrin

Nabi

R. L.

(2002) “Does Television Viewing Cultivate Unrealistic Expectations about Marriage?,” Journal of Communication 52(2): 247–63.

55.

Shelton

D. E.

Kim

Y. S.

Barak

(2006) “A Study of Juror Expectations and Demands Concerning Scientific Evidence: Does the ‘CSI Effect’ Exist?,” Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law 9(2): 331–68.

56.

Shostak

(2005) “The Emergence of Toxicogenomics: A Case Study of Molecularization,” Social Studies of Science 35(3): 367–403.

57.

Shrum

L. J.

(2002) “Media Consumption and Perceptions of Social Reality: Effects and Underlying Processes,” in Bryant

Zillman

(eds) Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research, pp. 69–96. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

58.

Steinke

(2005) “Cultural Representations of Gender and Science: Portrayals of Female Scientists and Engineers in Popular Films,” Science Communication 27(1): 27–63.

59.

Tait

(2006) “Autoptic Vision and the Necrophilic Imaginary in CSI,” International Journal of Cultural Studies 9(1): 45–62.

60.

Taussig

K. S.

Rapp

Heath

(2003) “Flexible Eugenics: Technologies of the Self in the Age of Genetics,” in Goodman

A. H.

Heath

Lindee

M. S.

(eds) Genetic Nature/Culture: Anthropology and Science beyond the Two-Culture Divide, pp. 58–76. Berkeley: University of California Press.

61.

Turow

(1997) “James Dean in a Surgical Gown,” in Spigel

Curtain

(eds) The Revolution Wasn’t Televised: Sixties TV and Social Conflict, pp. 185–99. New York: Routledge.

62.

Turow

Gans

(2002) “As Seen on TV: Health Policy Issues on TV’s Medical Dramas,” Report to the Kaiser Family Foundation.

63.

Tyler

T. R.

(2006) “Viewing CSI and the Threshold of Guilt: Managing Truth and Justice in Reality and Fiction,” Yale Law Journal 115: 1050–85.

64.

Wagner

(2008) To Know Where He Lies: DNA Technology and the Search for Srebrenica’s Missing Children. Berkeley: University of California Press.

65.

Wallack

Bingle

G. J.

(1996) “Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation on Television” [letter], New England Journal of Medicine 335: 1606.

66.

Weissmann

Boyle

(2007) “Evidence of Things Unseen: The Pornographic Aesthetic and the Search for Truth in CSI,” in Allen

(ed.) Reading CSI: Crime TV under the Microscope, pp. 90–102. London: I.B. Tauris.

67.

Willing

(2004) “‘CSI Effect’ Has Juries Wanting More Evidence,” USA Today 5 August: 1A.