Do We Need More Technologies in Courts? Mapping Concerns for Legal Technologies in Courts

Barysė, Dovilė

doi:10.2139/ssrn.4218897

SSRN Journal

2022

DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.4218897

|View full text |Cite

Do We Need More Technologies in Courts? Mapping Concerns for Legal Technologies in Courts

Dovilė Barysė

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2023

2024

Publication Types

Select...

Article2

Relationship

Self Cite1

Independent1

Authors

Journals

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…because they lack expertise. Still, even without perfect knowledge, people may hold opinions and preferences over the usefulness of—and need for—technologies in the courts (see, e.g., Barysė 2022a , b ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Algorithms in the court: does it matter which part of the judicial decision-making is automated?

Barysė

Sarel

2023

Artif Intell Law

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Artificial intelligence plays an increasingly important role in legal disputes, influencing not only the reality outside the court but also the judicial decision-making process itself. While it is clear why judges may generally benefit from technology as a tool for reducing effort costs or increasing accuracy, the presence of technology in the judicial process may also affect the public perception of the courts. In particular, if individuals are averse to adjudication that involves a high degree of automation, particularly given fairness concerns, then judicial technology may yield lower benefits than expected. However, the degree of aversion may well depend on how technology is used, i.e., on the timing and strength of judicial reliance on algorithms. Using an exploratory survey, we investigate whether the stage in which judges turn to algorithms for assistance matters for individual beliefs about the fairness of case outcomes. Specifically, we elicit beliefs about the use of algorithms in four different stages of adjudication: (i) information acquisition, (ii) information analysis, (iii) decision selection, and (iv) decision implementation. Our analysis indicates that individuals generally perceive the use of algorithms as fairer in the information acquisition stage than in other stages. However, individuals with a legal profession also perceive automation in the decision implementation stage as less fair compared to other individuals. Our findings, hence, suggest that individuals do care about how and when algorithms are used in the courts.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Algorithms in the court: does it matter which part of the judicial decision-making is automated?

Barysė

Sarel

2023

Artif Intell Law

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Surveying Judges about artificial intelligence: profession, judicial adjudication, and legal principles

Martinho

2024

AI & Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

hi@scite.ai

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

Do We Need More Technologies in Courts? Mapping Concerns for Legal Technologies in Courts

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Algorithms in the court: does it matter which part of the judicial decision-making is automated?

Algorithms in the court: does it matter which part of the judicial decision-making is automated?

Surveying Judges about artificial intelligence: profession, judicial adjudication, and legal principles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About