The "CSI Effect" is a theoretical phenomenon that was conceived through a series of speculative anecdotes from lawyers who claimed that jurors are influenced by the portrayals of forensic science on the forensic crime drama, CSI: Crime Scene Investigation. Alarmist reports and complaints from legal professionals prompted investigations in various fields as researchers attempted to find evidence of the CSI Effect lawyers had constructed. Studies from both legal scholars and researchers in behavioral and social sciences have used various models to uncover the alleged existence of the CSI Effect, yet the majority have not produced any significant empirical data to support the theory. Despite this, the CSI Effect has had an incredible impact in the courtroom, with many legal professionals acting against a phenomenon that has not been proven to be real. To understand the CSI Effect, it must be deconstructed. In this study, a content analysis of articles published on the CSI Effect is conducted to highlight important themes that illuminate how this theory has been approached in the field of psychology. Through this study, five themes are examined to reveal how the CSI Effect research has been defined, where it originates, how legal professionals have influenced psychologists, and how, despite lacking evidence of its existence, both researchers and legal professionals have sustained beliefs and proposed interventions against this phenomenon in the courtroom. Keywords: CSI Effect, jury decision-making, forensic science, qualitative study