Why true crime fans can’t stop refreshing case updates online

Boston University media researcher Kathryn D. Coduto has spent years studying why some people cannot step away once they start following a case. Her work on Karen Read and Gabby Petito points to the same pattern again and again: the urge is not only to watch, but to keep refreshing, reposting, and re-entering the story until the case starts to shape mood and attention.

Why the refresh loop is so sticky

True crime has a built-in pull that fiction does not. It offers a real mystery, identifiable stakes, the promise of justice, and the chance to analyze timelines, motives, evidence, and public behavior as if you are part of the investigation. That is part of why a case can become an online ecosystem, especially when new filings, interviews, body-camera clips, or courtroom developments arrive in fragments.

Coduto, an assistant professor of media science in Boston University’s Department of Mass Communication, Advertising and Public Relations, studies how people use media to connect with each other and make sense of the world around them. In true crime, that impulse can intensify fast, because a follower is not just reading about a defendant or a victim, but joining a crowd that debates every update in real time.

Cases like Gabby Petito and Karen Read show how quickly a single story can become a sustained social-media habit. On TikTok and X, the feed rewards the newest theory, the sharpest clip, and the most confident interpretation, which makes the act of checking feel productive even when the underlying facts have not changed.

What Coduto’s research says about compulsive case-following

Coduto’s paper, “Compulsive Use of Social Media in Emerging Crime News Stories,” appeared in Psychology of Popular Media, volume 14, issue 4, on pages 593 to 602. The study looks at how compulsive social media use relates to crime-media consumption, especially the decision to post. It finds that true-crime followers can get sucked into cases and compulsively use and post about them.

That is the important shift: the behavior is not only interest, but repetition. When the same case starts driving multiple checks a day, comment threads, reposts, and private group chats, the story is no longer just information. It becomes part of routine, and that is where fascination can start to look like stress.

A Boston University Arts & Sciences Center for Innovation in Social Science feature dated August 14, 2025, tied true-crime consumption to well-being. In a BU alumni event recorded on October 15, 2025, Coduto discussed social media addiction and parasocial relationships in true-crime fandom. Those ideas matter because the most intense followers are often not just tracking evidence; they are forming a one-sided bond with the people and personalities orbiting the case.

Google Scholar lists 453 total citations for Coduto and 420 since 2021.

When interest turns into overload

The warning signs are often practical before they are dramatic. You may be checking for updates without learning anything new, or feeling a spike of anxiety every time a fresh post appears. You may also notice that the case starts distorting your sense of risk, making one story feel like it reflects the world more broadly than it does.

Three signals tend to show up together:

• You refresh for updates even when you know there is no new filing, hearing, or statement.

• You feel emotionally attached to theories, personalities, or online camps that have little to do with verified evidence.

• You start treating speculation like a clue, which is where rumor can outrun the record.

True crime feeds can blur evidence and performance. A 2021 Psychology Today piece on Gabby Petito called the phenomenon “true-crime rubbernecking” on social media, and the case was boosted by social media and the true-crime craze.

How to follow true crime without letting it take over

The best guardrails are simple, and they work because they put the record back in charge. Keep official developments separate from commentary, especially when a case is moving through court and the loudest posts are often the least disciplined. If a case is generating more adrenaline than information, that is a sign to step away for a while.

A few habits help keep the balance:

• Read court documents, prosecutor statements, and police releases before scrolling theory threads.

• Decide how often you will check for updates, then stop outside that window.

• Notice when your mood is being driven by the feed rather than by new facts.

• Be careful when a case starts feeling personal, because parasocial attachment can make every update hit harder than it should.

Coduto’s research suggests that the problem is not curiosity itself. It is the point where curiosity turns into compulsive checking, compulsive posting, and a social identity built around the case.