As the review of literature does not demonstrate a cohesive collection of studies that either support or oppose the “CSI effect”, this paper therefore concludes that the most effective means to examine influence towards the jurors will have to rely on a case-to-case approach. Community psychology can then be regarded as a fundamental element in the further examination of juror responses towards phenomenon such as the “CSI effect” (Kelly, 2006; Toro, 2005).
Further examinations can then utilization the law and psychology. Basically, in addition to the people’s perceptions as formed by television shows, jurors also have some form of perception how the law works and how their citizenship requires them to comply with certain justice requests. Hence, there is also the perception when it comes to their role as jurors, especially as jurors go through the stages of orientation, open conflict and reconciliation during the entire trial proceedings (Levett, et al. , 2005).
This study therefore presents that although the “CSI effect” is valid only up to a certain degree and in certain cases which further need examination based on community profiling, there is the recommendation as to the importance of adapting an effective screening process. This is because the possibility of having a jury member getting affected by the “CSI effect” is possible. It should be noted that when it comes to jury dynamics, there are the identified influences based on certain characteristic types, and through persuasion, a juror can convince other members based on perceptions validated by television shows.
This is why even though the “CSI effect” seems to remain in an obscure light, the need for effective jury selection and screening remains. In a sense, the possibility of a “CSI effect” infiltrating the jury is still possible, and whether this is the case or not, it is important that the justice system applies means that ensures efficiency and effectiveness in its jury trial proceedings.
And since that there is the generally acknowledged media impact towards perception as can be already seen in protecting jurors from media exposure during the trial, the screening for the jurors should also therefore include how their television habits in addition to media exposure may critically affect their behavior and decision-making processes during the course of the trial.
At this point what the justice system can do is respond to the potential effects brought about by media messages, but controlling the shows such as CSI for the purpose of ensuring justice is not a solution. Rather, the burden can be initially initiated by the justice system especially as to how it may implement certain processes that condition jurors to adapt an objective view when it comes to trials. In addition, judge instructions play an important role in conveying instructions to the jury, especially as to how evidence will play into the trial.
Juror selection, therefore, should consider traits that possess objectivity and logic, not a sense of know-how according to media exposure. The “CSI effect” on jurors can then be regarded as a hovering possibility that may exist in certain situations. The response towards this phenomenon should therefore identify the possible channels of cultivation, and in order to execute this, at this point a perceived effective procedure is by means of a case approach as per community.
This is then a potential direction of this study as the resolution as to the impact of the “CSI effect” remains to be unresolved, and a means to examine its true impact is to localize the assessment per community where the selection of the jury members are going to be based on in the first place.
Anderson, S. , Volker, J. & Philips, M. (2008). The Forensic Marketing Case Study Methods. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 73, 4+. Appel, M. (2008). Fictional Narratives Create Just-World Beliefs. Journal of Communication, 58, 62-83.