A recent study conducted with Moscow State University of Psychology and Education experts explored how fans of documentary style true crime—specifically narratives about real serial killers—perceive criminals differently. The findings show that people who enjoy true crime content often respond with greater sympathy and pity toward the criminals, sometimes even expressing empathy. They also tend to overestimate how often such crimes occur and rate the danger level as higher than it actually is. This insight was shared with socialbites.ca by researchers from MSUPE.
In the broader media landscape, true crime has surged in popularity and now dominates many information channels. Podcasts and television series built around true events have the power to shape public understanding of crime, sometimes amplifying fear and shaping attitudes toward justice and safety.
The researchers proposed a clear hypothesis: an obsession with the true crime genre could distort people’s perception of serial crime, making it seem more prevalent and more threatening than it is. They set out to determine whether there are measurable differences in how the image of a serial criminal is formed among those who actively seek out true crime content versus individuals who do not engage with this genre. The study captured these dynamics by examining attitudes, emotions, and cognitive associations linked to criminal figures.
In their experimental design, the team recruited 76 participants aged 18 to 25. Half of them showed a clear interest in true crime materials, while the other half did not. Across multiple assessments, the results aligned with prior work indicating that fascination with true crime often correlates with overestimations of the frequency of serial offenses. Those drawn to true crime were more likely to believe that serial crimes occur with greater regularity and to rate the danger posed by these offenses as higher. Emotional responses such as fear, anxiety, and concern appeared more pronounced among this group, underscoring the emotional impact of consuming such content.
Beyond numerical estimates, the study revealed that enthusiasts frequently form stronger associations between criminals and vivid, emotionally charged details of cases. They were more apt to describe criminals as highly intelligent individuals whose quiet or passive behavior can provoke feelings of sadness and unease. In several assessments, participants from the true crime group expressed sympathy or pity toward the criminals, signaling a shift in how moral judgment and empathy are applied within this genre framework.
The implications extend to how audiences interpret criminal behavior in the real world. When people overemphasize the prevalence of serial crimes, they may also develop heightened vigilance or sensationalized beliefs about the criminal justice system. This can influence opinions on policy, policing, and the allocation of resources for crime prevention. Understanding these perceptual biases is essential for educators, media professionals, and public health communicators who seek to present crime narratives responsibly while maintaining engaging storytelling.
These results contribute to a growing body of evidence about the media’s influence on perception and emotion. They highlight the need for critical media literacy, encouraging audiences to differentiate between dramatic storytelling and statistical reality. For students and researchers, the study underscores how genre preferences can shape cognitive processing, memory, and affective responses when confronted with information about criminal activity.
In the context of higher education and professional practice, the findings emphasize the importance of balancing engaging content with accurate representation. Educators and program designers can use these insights to develop curricula that foster critical thinking about crime reporting, while creators of true crime content can explore responsible storytelling that avoids inflating risk perceptions. The study from MSUPE thus offers both a cautionary perspective on media effects and a roadmap for more nuanced, evidence-based discussions about crime in popular culture.