Forensic Students' Views on TV Shows

The CSI effect at university: forensic science students’
television viewing
and perceptions of ethical issues
Roslyn Weaver
a
*, Yenna Salamonson
a
, Jane Koch
a,b
and Glenn Porter
c
a
University of Western Sydney, Family and Community Health
Research Group;
b
University of
Technology, Sydney, School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health;
c
University of Western Sydney,
School of Science and Health
(Received 3 January 2012; final version received 3 May 2012)

Although the so-called ‘CSI effect’ has received attention in the
literature for the
influence of forensic science television on jurors’ expectations
of evidence
admitted into trials, less research explores the influence of such
television
programs on university students enrolled in forensic science
degrees. This paper
describes the quantitative and qualitative results of a study of
forensic science
students regarding the forensic-related television programs they
watch, such as
CSI, Bones and Dexter. We asked students to share their
impressions of the
accuracy, ethics, professionalism and role models in the
programs. The results
show that forensic science students are almost universally
disparaging about the
realism of these programs and have mixed impressions of how
the programs
portray forensic science professionalism and ethics. Most
students believed that
the programs gave an unrealistic representation of the
profession to the public;
yet students were also able to identify positive elements for
recruitment and
education purposes.
Keywords: forensic science; CSI effect; students; television;
education; Australia
Introduction
Popular media have suggested that crime science television
programs such as CSI
may influence how lay jurors consider forensic evidence during

criminal trials
1–8
.
This influence has been described as the CSI effect and named
after the popular
television drama. It is suggested that jurors confuse the capacity
of forensic evidence
with the fictional idealisation of forensic evidence as portrayed
on the television
program
2
. Goodman-Delahunty and Verbrugge
4
suggest that, despite the popular
media claims, there is little objective evidence to support the
notion that crime scene
dramas such as CSI have a negative impact on jury verdicts.
Wise
5
indicated that
there are two issues relating to the ‘CSI effect’ proposition,
with each affecting either
the prosecution or defence position; (i) the jurors held an
inflated value of the
forensic evidence producing guilty verdicts
2–5,9
, or (ii) in the absence of forensic

evidence or when the evidence failed to reach the juries’
idealised expectations the
juries would acquit
2–3,5
. Evidence of the influence of the CSI effect, as claimed in the
popular media, has been mixed
1–9
.
Although the so-called CSI effect has received attention in the
literature for the
influence of CSI on jurors’ expectations of forensic evidence
admitted into criminal
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences
Vol. 44, No. 4, December 2012, 381–391
ISSN 0045-0618 print/ISSN 1834-562X online
� 2012 Australian Academy of Forensic Sciences
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00450618.2012.691547
http://www.tandfonline.com
trials
1–9
, less research explores the influence of such programs on
forensic science

education. Of the work that has been done, previous research
has linked the
glamorised portrayal of forensic scientists in popular culture to
an increase in the
number of students interested in forensic science
10–13
. Although most of the more
well-known forensic science television programs are American,
the popularity of the
genre extends internationally, and many more forensic science
courses have been
established in Australia
14
and the UK
10,15
, as well as the US
14,16,17
.
Beyond the growth of the courses, other research has also raised
concerns over
whether television programs may have an adverse effect on
forensic science students.
Students may have unrealistic expectations of the course, if not
for their career as
well
11
. The CSI series generally constructs science and evidence as
infallible, and

emphasises their realism and credibility
18
. Bergslien
19
suggests that the actual teaching
of forensic science in secondary and tertiary education may
inadvertently reinforce the
CSI effect; others caution that educators may need to adjust
their teaching in response
to the television genre
11
. Undergraduates may be motivated to study forensic science
because of CSI-like programs, and this could provide the
impetus to educators to
develop resources to enhance the understanding of the basic
principles of science and
critical thinking. However, Bergslien
19
asserts that in some courses, less challenging
teaching approaches can reduce the complexity of forensic
science to a standard
laboratory activity with a clear-cut solution, as in the television
programs. Rather than
this, Bergslien suggests some teaching strategies that help
students develop realistic
expectations about how real forensic science is carried out
19
. Some researchers suggest

that educators in crime-related disciplines can combat the
inaccurate images in
popular culture by including courses on the media, to encourage
students to be more
critical about how their profession is handled in news and other
media
20
.
With mainstream media sources attributing the rise in
popularity in forensic
studies to the heightened profile of the profession because of
these shows, it is timely
to assess the ways in which forensic students engage with
popular culture depictions
of their future profession. Little work has been done in this
area, although an
American study on forensic anthropology students concluded
that there was no
difference in how many CSI-like programs were consumed by
students who wished
to pursue forensic science and those who did not
21
.
The aims of this study were to investigate the viewing habits of
a sample of
Australian forensic science students regarding the forensic-
related television
programs they watch, and their impressions of the accuracy,
ethics, professionalism
and role models in the shows. The purpose was to enhance our
understanding of how
forensic science students engage with popular images of their

profession and to
consider pedagogical implications of the findings.
Methods
Design
This study used a descriptive design to collect data on students’
perceptions of
forensic science television programs. The survey questions were
based on Czarny
et al.’s survey
22
, which explored television viewing habits of medical and
nursing
students for the purpose of considering teaching strategies for
bioethical issues in
health. They asked students about specific contemporary
television programs and
what students thought of the accuracy, bioethical issues, and
role models depicted in
the shows. In our study, we adapted this instrument to the
forensic science discipline
382 R. Weaver et al.
and included shows specific to this field: namely, CSI, CSI:
Miami, CSI: New York,
Bones, Dexter and NCIS. We chose these six programs based on
current popular
programs at the time of the survey. Students were given the
option to nominate other

forensic science television programs, and we aggregated these
data as well; however,
the overall percentage of participant-nominated shows was
small and thus not
generally reported here. Our survey included questions related
to demographics,
television viewing, and impressions of how the specific forensic
science programs
portrayed ethical and forensic science issues, as well as
professionalism and role
models. We also added questions about the image of forensic
science on television
programs. The survey concluded with a question asking if
participants had any
comments they wished to include on the topic of their
profession in popular culture.
Study setting and sample
The study took place at a large university in New South Wales,
Australia, between
March and May of 2011 in the first semester. Forensic science
students enrolled in all
years of their three-year undergraduate program participated by
completing surveys.
The university’s human research ethics committee granted
approval to conduct this
project. Surveys were anonymous, and students were informed
that their
participation in the project was voluntary.
The study was part of a larger project exploring health sciences
and forensic
science students’ impressions of how their profession is
represented in popular
culture. This paper reports the results of forensic science

students’ surveys.
Of the 215 students who were enrolled in the forensic science
program, 135 (63%)
completed the survey. Compared with all forensic students
enrolled in the program,
there were no significant differences in: (a) age (mean: 20.8
years in population versus
20.6 in sample, P¼0.889), (b) gender (68.4% females versus
68.1%, P¼0.965), and
(c) country of birth (80.9% Australian-born versus 84.4%,
P¼0.402).
Data collection and analysis
All students enrolled in the forensic science program were
invited to participate in
the study in their tutorials or lectures. A research assistant
managed the recruitment
for the study. Students were informed about the purpose of the
study and were given
an information sheet providing details of the project.
A research assistant entered the survey data into IBM SPSS
Statistics 19. The
data analysis process included descriptive statistics. As the
continuous variable age
was not normally distributed, the Mann-Whitney U-test was
used to analyse group
differences. For categorical variables, the chi-square test was
used. Statistical
significance was P 5 0.05.
We performed further data analysis to examine if there were
differences across
years in the course and: (a) TV viewing habits of forensic

science dramas; (b)
important sources of information for participants for bioethical
issues. No
statistically significant group differences were uncovered
between years of enrolment
and TV viewing habits or participants’ self-report of important
sources of
information for bioethical issues.
Following quantitative data analysis, the members of the
research team
individually read the qualitative data and then discussed the
data with each other.
These data were drawn from responses to the final survey
question: Is there anything
Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences 383
else you want to tell us about forensic television shows or
forensic science role models?
We also included any comments students wrote on their surveys
to explain their
other answers further. A research assistant entered the
participants’ comments into
Microsoft Word. The qualitative data analysis involved team
members organising
the data by themes in a conventional content analysis approach
23
and discussing as a
group, and we have used the data in this paper to elaborate on
the quantitative
results. Participants’ quotations have been corrected for spelling

or readability where
needed, and are presented here in numerical codes with year of
enrolment.
Results
Table 1 presents the demographics of the study participants.
The average age was
20.6 (SD 4.4), and approximately two-thirds of the sample were
female (68.1%).
Most students were born in Australia (84.4%) and just over half
were in paid
employment (57.0%); only one nominated working in forensic-
or police-related
employment.
Participants’ television viewing
The majority of the students had watched television in the past
year (98.5%), ranging
from sports (58.5%) to movies (97.0%). Forensic science shows
were watched by
91.1% of the sample. Of these forensic science programs, NCIS
(81.1%) and CSI
(79.8%) had been viewed by the most students at some stage.
Around two-thirds had
seen CSI: Miami, Bones, and Dexter. However, the most
frequently watched shows
(at least once a week) were NCIS, Bones and Dexter.
Approximately a third reported
watching the top five most-frequently watched shows with
family or friends.
Participants’ television viewing habits are summarised in Table
2.
Table 1. Characteristics of forensic student participants (n ¼

135).
Characteristic
Age, mean (SD) years (Range: 17 to 46 years) 20.6 (4.4)
Sex, Female % 68.1
Country of birth, Australia % 84.4
Language spoken at home: English-speaking only % 82.2
Participating in part-time/paid employment during semester,
Yes % 57.0
Table 2. Television viewing habits of forensic science students
of forensic science dramas.
Forensic drama
Ever
watched (%)
Watched�once/
week (%)
Watched with
family or friends (%)
NCIS 81.1 27.9 50.9
CSI 79.8 19.3 44.7
CSI: Miami 66.0 12.3 34.7
Bones 64.7 24.5 39.8
Dexter 61.9 24.8 33.0
CSI: New York 47.6 5.8 21.1
Criminal Minds 10.4 8.9 6.7
NCIS: LA 7.4 5.2 5.9

Ethical issues recalled by students from TV shows
When students were provided with a list of 12 ethical issues and
asked if they
remembered seeing any on the television programs, 65.2% to
80.0% of the sample
reported seeing these issues. The most commonly recalled
topics were contamination
of evidence, conflict of interest, confidentiality, and evidence
integrity. Students were
then asked to rate how each issue was handled overall on the
shows, and could
choose from: Poor, Below Average, OK, and Best. The most
common rating for
these issues was Poor. Only three topics rated as OK, namely:
evidence integrity,
death and dying, and quality or value of life (Table 3).
When asked to rate the accuracy on a six-point Likert scale of
how the top six
programs depicted ethical and forensic science issues, students
rated these shows
with a median of 1 to 2 (0¼Not at all accurate, 5¼Very
accurate). The qualitative
data supported this, with students at times scathing of the shows
– ‘inaccurate
rubbish’ (Student 3, Year 1) – or suggesting that the programs
give unrealistic ideas
about the consequences for unethical behaviour. As one student
stated, ‘TV show
characters aren’t exactly going to get fired for not taking
responsibility or
contaminating evidence but, in reality of course you would get
fired’ (Student 86,

Year 1). Others were critical of the inaccuracy of the forensic
science aspects, with
one student saying: ‘I think the things they do on the shows are
mostly correct, but
the main difference is time. As on the show they figure
everything out in a few days,
but normally it can take weeks, months or even years to figure
out the crime’
(Student 48, Year 1). Another participant added, ‘TV shows
always give the
misperception that forensics/science is easy and that we do
more than we legally can’
(Student 119, Year 2).
Despite the negative views that most students had about the
accuracy, some
students could find value in watching the shows. Thus, even
when acknowledging the
shortcomings of the shows, some participants appreciated that
the programs
generate interest in their field: ‘Forensic TV shows are a good
way of getting people
into the profession but lack truth in what really goes behind the
scenes’ (Student 47,
Year 1). Similarly, another wrote ‘Gives an idea of different
types of forensics you
can go in to but not accurate/realistic in what they actually do
beyond the general
role’ (Student 6, Year 1).
Table 3. Recall of ethical issues on television forensic drama
and ratings.
Ethical issue
Recall
(Yes) %

Most common
rating %
Contamination of evidence 80.0 Poor 37.0
Conflict of interest 80.0 Poor 33.3
Confidentiality 80.0 Poor & below average (tie) 33.3
Evidence integrity 80.0 OK 32.4
Professional misconduct 77.8 Poor 37.1
Death and dying 77.8 OK 32.4
Evidence continuity 77.0 Poor 37.5
Informed consent 76.3 Poor 35.0
Quality or value of life 74.1 OK 43.0
Lying under oath in court 71.9 Poor 33.0
Forensic errors 71.1 Poor 41.7
Education for healthcare professionals 65.2 Poor 44.3
Another participant criticised the shows but saw an educational
element: ‘I think
that it is good in the sense that they make people think, but bad
in the sense that they
exploit the science and aren’t true to it, cause people spend
their whole lives trying to
learn this stuff and they just throw it around like it doesn’t
matter’ (Student 5,
Year 1). One student found more of value, writing, ‘watching
forensic television
shows I learn more about techniques and critical thinking
towards ethical and
practical views’ (Student 125, Year 2).
Almost half (49.6%) the students said that they had been asked

for their opinion
by friends or family members on an ethical or forensic science
issue they had viewed
on a television show. One participant wrote that ‘They ask if the
science is true’
(Student 5, Year 1). In regard to discussing the ethical and
forensic science issues on
TV programs with their friends only, less than half (40.5%) of
the students reported
that they had done this.
When presented with a range of sources that might inform
students about
bioethical issues, students ranked their university school of
sciences as the most
important (67.7%). Other important sources included family
(54.3%) and friends
(40.0%). Television dramas rated as important for only 3% of
the sample (Figure 1).
Professionalism
The surveys included a list of six professional ideals:
responsibility; altruism/honesty/
integrity; caring and compassion; respect; accountability; and
leadership. Most
students (approximately 80%) remembered viewing these on the
forensic science
programs, and the majority believed that they were positively
depicted.
Despite these positive ratings, the qualitative comments
highlighted some
negative aspects around professionalism, with one participant
noting ‘TV shows

Figure 1. Important sources of information selected by
participants for bioethical issues.
set unrealistic standards or over simplify work with a lack of
professionalism’
Role models
We provided the students with a list of the major characters in
each of the six
programs and asked them to choose the characters they wanted
most and least to be
like in their own forensic science careers. They could also
nominate other characters.
The most popular characters were Abby Sciuto from NCIS
(37.8%), and
Temperance Brennan from Bones (23.7%). Dexter Morgan from
Dexter was also
a popular character (19.3%), although slightly more students
disliked him as a role
model (20.7%), and we note here, of course, that Dexter
obviously differs from other
characters by operating as both hero (a highly-skilled forensic
scientist) and antihero
(a vigilante serial killer). The most unpopular character was
Horatio Caine from
CSI: Miami (24.4%), as rated by the students (Figure 2).
The qualitative data elaborated on these results, with some
students explaining
that they admired the skills of specific characters but not

necessarily their other
traits. For example, although Temperance Brennan, Jack
Hodgins (Bones) and Abby
Sciuto were popular choices for role models, one participant
indicated that this was
‘Skillwise but not people wise’ (Student 5, Year 1). The
polarised views about Dexter
Morgan as a role model are encapsulated in one participant who
chose Dexter as a
Figure 2. Forensic drama characters: role models in professional
career.
role model but noted, rather obviously, ‘Without being a serial
killer’ (Student 17,
Year 1).
Some students also indicated in the open-ended answers that
they found role
models beyond those in television programs, with one student
reflecting on the
importance of real-life inspirations: ‘A girl from the forensic
services group came in
to my work and I would most want to be like her. Not some
actress’ (Student 133,
Year 2). Another confirmed that superior role models are found
outside popular
culture, writing ‘The best role models are the people working in
the profession’
(Student 73, Year 2). These points reflect the fact that the
participants’ comments
were usually very negative about the realism and accuracy of

these shows.
The image of forensic science in television shows
The surveys asked students what they thought of how forensic
science was portrayed
on television. Although most students believed the shows
portrayed their profession
as exciting (98.4%) and positive (92.9%), they also thought the
programs gave an
unrealistic representation of the real science (78.4%).
Furthermore, just over half
(51.6%) believed that there should be less forensic science
characters on crime shows,
and about the same percentage (47.6%) felt that the characters
were not good role
models. In addition, the majority (80.8%) believed that TV
shows give the public
wrong ideas about what forensic scientists actually do.
These views were reflected in the open-ended answers, where
students were often
negative about the public perception of forensic science because
of television. Even
those who enjoyed the shows often qualified this enjoyment
with a warning about the
misinformation caused by the shows in the public: ‘Forensic
science TV shows are
fun and interesting to watch, however they do at times give
false representations
about what forensic science in real life is about’ (Student 37,
Year 1). Others
confirmed this, saying ‘I think people often get the wrong idea
about forensics’
(Student 110, Year 2), or: ‘Detectives and forensic investigators
& many numerous

roles in TV convince the general public that it is all one job’
Some comments raised the danger of inaccurate portrayals of
forensic science on
television, with one participant writing that ‘Television shows
give people the wrong
idea. When evidence is put to court, the jury will want all the
evidence to point to the
suspect before they will convict them as that is what happens on
the shows’ (Student
11, Year 2).
Discussion
This study confirms previous research in other disciplines that
most students watch
their profession on television, with other studies showing that
most medical and
nursing students watch medical programs
22,24
. As the participants noted, one of the
positive elements of these shows is that portraying forensic
science in popular
television programs can enhance recruitment and provide ideas
about the spectrum
of technologies and specialties available in the career. The
participants’ comments
about this topic (‘Forensic TV shows are a good way of getting
people into the
profession’) confirm the research pointing to the positive aspect
of these shows in
attracting people who may otherwise be unaware of the
profession

11,14–17
.
Given almost half our sample discussed ethical or science issues
from television
programs with family or friends, it is possible to see the value
of exploring the shows
in forensic science curricula. Given the importance of teaching
ethics well in forensic
science
13
, this may be seen as an effective strategy of teaching ethical
issues in an
engaging way. It would appear that the participants in our study
were well able to
remember ethical important issues from the programs, such as
contamination of
evidence, conflict of interest, confidentiality, and evidence
integrity. This is not to
suggest that television is an important source of information for
them; as it is, the
results show students rank television extremely low as an
influence. The participants
in this project, moreover, are enrolled in a course designed to
challenge them to
consider issues associated with forensic science reliability, such
as methods of
expressing forensic findings, effects of contextual bias from
police investigators and

defence counsel, contamination issues, evidence integrity and
continuity, statistical
representation and inference, and visual communication in
forensic science, which
are important issues to cover in any forensic science curricula.
However, most participants indicated that the depiction of
science on television
was inaccurate and unrealistic. This finding seems to contradict
previous research
that raises concerns that students in forensic science may have
unrealistic and
exaggerated ideas of what their jobs will entail because of
television programs
11,20
.
Just as the CSI effect in jurors is a disputed notion and can lack
evidence to support
it
25,26
, we suggest that students are more sceptical of these shows
than researchers or
educators might assume. Yet although participants criticised the
science, ethics and
role models provided by the programs, our results show that
most students watch the
television programs and find them to be positive representations
of forensic science,
and can enjoy watching them. Their critiques also indicate that
television images of
forensic science can help in some ways their learning of
science, and ethical issues,
and also the development of their professional identity to some

extent.
The positive assessment of forensic science professionalism on
television by
students (80%) is unexpected, given it is possible to see
deviations from professional
ideals at many times across forensic science programs. Yet this
finding perhaps
reflects the narrative construction of many forensic science
characters as honourable,
and committed to seeking justice for victims of crime. The
popularity of some
characters over others may explain this, with role models such
as Brennan and
Hodgins (Bones) and Abby (NCIS) noteworthy for their high
skills and intellect,
despite their unusual personality quirks. We suggest that the
higher level of
popularity for Abby might well be explained by the fact that the
character is young
and female, which largely reflects the cohort we surveyed. This
is not to imply that
students primarily find role models in fiction or even prefer
them. It is worth
emphasising here that some participants’ comments give more
credence to role
models from within the forensic science industry, and this is
reflected in the finding
that almost half the sample believed television characters were
poor role models in
general. Indeed, more than half the students actually felt there
should be less forensic
science characters in crime shows, which perhaps suggests that
they believe the
forensic science profession is over-represented in popular
culture – or, at the very

least, is represented in such narrow or inaccurate ways that it
would be preferable to
avoid it entirely.
Although previous research has addressed the CSI effect at
some length in the
context of jurors’ expectations of forensic evidence, there is
less work that explores
this topic in university students. One of the strengths of this
study is that it provides
some answers for educators interested in how university
students regard the popular
image of forensic science. Despite educators’ concerns, it
appears that forensic
science students – at least in our sample – are well able to
distinguish fact from
fiction and indeed are rather critical of the televisual
representations of forensic
science. A further strength is the mixed methods approach,
which allows the
qualitative data to enhance and elaborate on the quantitative
data in ways that are
sometimes lacking in other research.
The limitations of this study include being limited to one cohort
of students in
one university and thus it cannot be representative of all
forensic science students.
This research could be undertaken in other institutions
elsewhere to explore any
differences and similarities. We also acknowledge that our data

deal solely with
students’ perceptions of professionalism and that their
understanding of professional
behaviour is consequently likely to be evolving. Students’ field
and work experience
may also play a role in this. The qualitative data were also
limited to those students
who chose to write short responses to the survey questions.
Richer data could be
elicited with interviews.
Future research, therefore, could use in-depth qualitative
interviews with
students to explore this area further. Future studies could
explore students’ reasons
for their choice of forensic science. It would be interesting to
compare the retention
of those students whose entry into their course was influenced
by CSI-like programs
with those who were not, although such research relies on
students’ awareness of this
factor, which is necessarily difficult to measure. Closer analysis
of the shows
themselves and also research evaluating the effectiveness of
including courses on
media representations in forensic science education would help
to further build our
understanding of this important area of the images of forensic
science in popular
culture.
Acknowledgements
This project received funding from the University of Western
Sydney Research Grant Scheme.
Thank you to the students who participated in this project, and

also to Maricris Algoso,
Charmaine Miranda, and Ashleigh-Leane Gibbs for data
collection and data entry.
References
1. Podlas K. ‘The CSI effect’: exposing the media myth.
Fordham Intell Prop Media & Ent L
J. 2006;16:429–465.
2. Cole SA, Dioso-Villa R. Investigating the ‘CSI effect’ effect:
media and litigation crisis in
criminal law. Stan L Rev. 2008–2009;61:1335–1374.
3. Goodman-Delahunty J, Tait D. DNA and the changing face of
justice. Aust J Forensic
Sci. 2006;8:97–106.
4. Goodman-Delahunty J, Verbrugge H. Reality, fantasy and the
truth about CSI effects.
InPsych. 2010;2:18–19.
5. Wise J. Providing the CSI treatment: criminal justice
practitioners and the CSI effect.
CICJ. 2010;21:383–399.
6. Harriss C. The evidence doesn’t lie: genre literacy and the
‘CSI’ effect. J Pop Film Televis.
2011;39:5–11.
7. Shelton DE, Kim YS, Barak G. A study of juror expectations
and demands concerning
scientific evidence: does the ‘CSI Effect’ exist? Vanderbilt J of
Entertainment and Tech
Law. 2006;9:331–368.

8. Thomas AP. The CSI effect: fact or fiction. Yale L J.
2006;115:70–72.
9. Tyler TR. Is the CSI effect good science? Yale L J.
2006;115:73–75.
10. New Engineering Foundation. Preparing for the future:
applied and vocational science
provision at an intermediate level in further education colleges.
London, 2008.
11. Durnal EW. Crime scene investigation (as seen on TV).
Forensic Sci Int. 2010;199:1–5.
12. Colgan C. Teaching forensics, then and now. Edu Dig.
2002;68:59–61.
13. Capsambelis CR. So your student wants to be a crime scene
technician? JCJE.
2002;13:113–127.
14. Kobus H, Liddy M. University forensic science programs: a
student attraction strategy or
a value-adding partnership with industry? Forensic Sci Pol
Manag. 2009;1:125–129.
15. Mennell J. The future of forensic and crime scene science:
part II. A UK perspective on
forensic science education. Forensic Sci Int. 2006;157:S13–S20.
16. Cooley CM. Reforming the forensic science community to
avert the ultimate injustice.
Stan L & Pol Rev. 2004;15:381–436.
17. Houck MM. CSI: Reality. Sci Am. 2006;295:84–89.

18. Cavender G, Deutsch SK. CSI and moral authority: the
police and science. Crime Media
Cult 2007;3:67–81.
19. Bergslien E. Teaching to avoid the ‘CSI effect’. J Chem
Educ. 2006;83:609–691.
20. Anderson JF, Mangels NJ, Langsam AH. The challenges of
teaching criminological
theory: can academia deliver what the media promises? Crim
Justice Stud Crit J Crime
Law Soc. 2009;22:223–236.
21. McManus SE. Influence of the CSI effect on education and
mass media. Department of
Anthropology. MA thesis. Orlando: University of Central
Florida; 2010.
22. Czarny MJ, Faden RR, Nolan MT, Bodensiek E, Sugarman
J. Medical and nursing
students’ television viewing habits: potential implications for
bioethics. Am J Bioeth.
2008;8:1–8.
23. Hsieh H-F, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative
content analysis. Qual Health
Res. 2005;15:1277–1288.
24. Weaver R, Wilson I. Australian medical students’
perceptions of professionalism and
ethics in medical television programs. BMC Med Educ.
2011;11.50:1–6.
25. Brickell W. Is it the CSI effect or do we just distrust juries.
Crim Just. 2008;23:10–17.
26. Holmgren JA, Fordham J. The CSI effect and the Canadian

and the Australian jury. J
Forensic Sci. 2011;56:S63–S71.
Copyright of Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences is the
property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content
may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a
listserv without the copyright holder's express
written permission. However, users may print, download, or
email articles for individual use.
WRTG 391
Summary of Research Study Findings
Instructions:
In WRTG 391, you will eventually write a synthesis of sources
essay. In writing this essay, you
will conduct significant research for scholarly sources through
the UMUC Library and
Information Services interface.
In many cases, scholarly articles report the findings of a
research study. The article will provide
an introduction to the topic, review previous literature on the
topic, and then explain the

methodology, findings, and conclusions of the study.
The first assignment for this class, the Summary of Research
Study Findings, helps get you
started in finding scholarly articles and, specifically, research
studies. In this assignment, you
will find four articles from scholarly journals. Each of them
will report on a research
study.
You will show the findings of your studies in a format given to
you. When you complete the
form, the information will provide a summary of your research
in locating the four articles.
Please use the format on the following page. You can copy and
paste the information on the
following pages into a Word document and then fill the
information in.
Using the guidelines provided by the video and the template,
please post a rough draft of your
Summary of Research Findings as your instructor directs you.
After receiving feedback from
your instructor on your Summary of Research Findings, please
use the comments from your
instructor in revising the draft.
Your Topic _________________________

Article #1:
Author(s) and title of the article and the name of the journal:
Key terms in the article (list at least 5 terms):
Focus of study: This can be 3-4 sentences.
Conclusions of the author(s): This can be 1-2 sentences.
Your observations of what you learned about your topic from
this article and from this research study.
Please write 100-150 words for each article.
Article #2:

Article #3:
Article #4:

Part 1
Read the The CSI Effect at University article, imagine that this
is one of your articles for your critical annotated bibliography.
Please complete the following in responding to this discussion
thread:
1. List the article in APA format, as the second video describes.
2. Write a 150-to-200-word summary/critique of the article in
which you not only summarize the article but also note any
strengths or weaknesses you find in it.

Part 2
This discussion thread is designed to help you become familiar
with OneSearch. OneSearch is a service that is available
through UMUC’s Library and Information Services website. It
allows a user to locate scholarly articles and other resources
through a single search engine.
Please watch library tutorial #1.
Then respond to this discussion thread by answering the
following question and completing the following task:
1. What topic are you considering for your critical annotated
bibliography? In other words, on what general area of interest
are you going to locate 12 scholarly articles?
“ Negative Effects Childhood Obesity”
2. Find one article for your annotated bibliography using the
tips mentioned in the tutorial. Then list the source in APA
format and write your summary/critique of 150-200 words.
Part 3
Read assignment file
Video links
Video 2
http://polaris.umuc.edu/de/csi/2011_11_WRTG_391/a3_bibliogr
aphy_a01.html
library tutorial #1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-sAimlKuZE

Forensic Students' Views on TV Shows

Forensic Students' Views on TV Shows

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Ähnlich wie Forensic Students' Views on TV Shows

Ähnlich wie Forensic Students' Views on TV Shows (20)

Mehr von mehek4

Mehr von mehek4 (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Forensic Students' Views on TV Shows