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

IF 4.7 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AI & Society Pub Date : 2024-02-23 DOI:10.1007/s00146-024-01869-4

Andreia Martinho

{"title":"Surveying Judges about artificial intelligence: profession, judicial adjudication, and legal principles","authors":"Andreia Martinho","doi":"10.1007/s00146-024-01869-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>Artificial Intelligence (AI) is set to bring changes to legal systems. These technologies may have positive practical implications when it comes to access, efficiency, and accuracy in Justice. However, there are still many uncertainties and challenges associated with the implementation of AI in the legal space. In this research, we surveyed Judges on critical challenges related to the Judging Profession in the AI paradigm; Automated Adjudication; and Legal Principles. Our results suggest that (i) Judges are hesitant about changes in their profession. They signal the need for adequate training that fosters legal literacy in AI, but are less open to changes in legal writing or their social and institutional role; (ii) Judges believe higher levels of automation only lead to fair outcomes if used in earlier phases of adjudication; (iii) Judges believe and are concerned about AI leading to Techno-Legal Positivism; and (iv) Judges consider that Legal AI technologies may have a positive impact in some legal principles, as long as everyone has equal access to those technologies and cybersecurity and judge on the loop safeguards are in place; and (v) Judges are strongly concerned about the de-humanization of Justice. They consider that assessing evidence, analyzing arguments, and deciding on a legal case should be inherently human. By surveying these practitioners, we aim to foster a responsible, inclusive, and transparent innovation in Justice.</div>","PeriodicalId":47165,"journal":{"name":"AI & Society","volume":"40 2","pages":"569 - 584"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AI & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-024-01869-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is set to bring changes to legal systems. These technologies may have positive practical implications when it comes to access, efficiency, and accuracy in Justice. However, there are still many uncertainties and challenges associated with the implementation of AI in the legal space. In this research, we surveyed Judges on critical challenges related to the Judging Profession in the AI paradigm; Automated Adjudication; and Legal Principles. Our results suggest that (i) Judges are hesitant about changes in their profession. They signal the need for adequate training that fosters legal literacy in AI, but are less open to changes in legal writing or their social and institutional role; (ii) Judges believe higher levels of automation only lead to fair outcomes if used in earlier phases of adjudication; (iii) Judges believe and are concerned about AI leading to Techno-Legal Positivism; and (iv) Judges consider that Legal AI technologies may have a positive impact in some legal principles, as long as everyone has equal access to those technologies and cybersecurity and judge on the loop safeguards are in place; and (v) Judges are strongly concerned about the de-humanization of Justice. They consider that assessing evidence, analyzing arguments, and deciding on a legal case should be inherently human. By surveying these practitioners, we aim to foster a responsible, inclusive, and transparent innovation in Justice.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

调查法官对人工智能的看法：职业、司法裁决和法律原则

人工智能（AI）将给法律体系带来变化。这些技术可能对司法的获取、效率和准确性产生积极的实际影响。然而，在法律领域实施人工智能仍然存在许多不确定性和挑战。在这项研究中，我们调查了法官在人工智能范式下与法官职业相关的关键挑战；自动化的裁定;和法律原则。我们的研究结果表明(i)法官对其职业的变化犹豫不决。它们表明需要进行充分的培训，培养人工智能的法律素养，但对法律写作或其社会和机构角色的变化不太开放；法官认为，如果在裁决的早期阶段使用较高程度的自动化，则只能产生公平的结果；法官相信并担心人工智能会导致技术-法律实证主义；（iv）法官认为法律人工智能技术可能对某些法律原则产生积极影响，只要每个人都有平等的机会使用这些技术和网络安全，并有安全保障措施；法官们强烈关切司法的非人性化。他们认为评估证据、分析论点和决定法律案件应该是人类固有的。通过调查这些从业人员，我们的目标是促进司法领域负责任、包容和透明的创新。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

AI & Society COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE-

CiteScore

8.00

自引率

20.00%

发文量

257

期刊介绍： AI & Society: Knowledge, Culture and Communication, is an International Journal publishing refereed scholarly articles, position papers, debates, short communications, and reviews of books and other publications. Established in 1987, the Journal focuses on societal issues including the design, use, management, and policy of information, communications and new media technologies, with a particular emphasis on cultural, social, cognitive, economic, ethical, and philosophical implications. AI & Society has a broad scope and is strongly interdisciplinary. We welcome contributions and participation from researchers and practitioners in a variety of fields including information technologies, humanities, social sciences, arts and sciences. This includes broader societal and cultural impacts, for example on governance, security, sustainability, identity, inclusion, working life, corporate and community welfare, and well-being of people. Co-authored articles from diverse disciplines are encouraged. AI & Society seeks to promote an understanding of the potential, transformative impacts and critical consequences of pervasive technology for societies. Technological innovations, including new sciences such as biotech, nanotech and neuroscience, offer a great potential for societies, but also pose existential risk. Rooted in the human-centred tradition of science and technology, the Journal acts as a catalyst, promoter and facilitator of engagement with diversity of voices and over-the-horizon issues of arts, science, technology and society. AI & Society expects that, in keeping with the ethos of the journal, submissions should provide a substantial and explicit argument on the societal dimension of research, particularly the benefits, impacts and implications for society. This may include factors such as trust, biases, privacy, reliability, responsibility, and competence of AI systems. Such arguments should be validated by critical comment on current research in this area. Curmudgeon Corner will retain its opinionated ethos. The journal is in three parts: a) full length scholarly articles; b) strategic ideas, critical reviews and reflections; c) Student Forum is for emerging researchers and new voices to communicate their ongoing research to the wider academic community, mentored by the Journal Advisory Board; Book Reviews and News; Curmudgeon Corner for the opinionated. Papers in the Original Section may include original papers, which are underpinned by theoretical, methodological, conceptual or philosophical foundations. The Open Forum Section may include strategic ideas, critical reviews and potential implications for society of current research. Network Research Section papers make substantial contributions to theoretical and methodological foundations within societal domains. These will be multi-authored papers that include a summary of the contribution of each author to the paper. Original, Open Forum and Network papers are peer reviewed. The Student Forum Section may include theoretical, methodological, and application orientations of ongoing research including case studies, as well as, contextual action research experiences. Papers in this section are normally single-authored and are also formally reviewed. Curmudgeon Corner is a short opinionated column on trends in technology, arts, science and society, commenting emphatically on issues of concern to the research community and wider society. Normal word length: Original and Network Articles 10k, Open Forum 8k, Student Forum 6k, Curmudgeon 1k. The exception to the co-author limit of Original and Open Forum (4), Network (10), Student (3) and Curmudgeon (2) articles will be considered for their special contributions. Please do not send your submissions by email but use the "Submit manuscript" button. NOTE TO AUTHORS: The Journal expects its authors to include, in their submissions: a) An acknowledgement of the pre-accept/pre-publication versions of their manuscripts on non-commercial and academic sites. b) Images: obtain permissions from the copyright holder/original sources. c) Formal permission from their ethics committees when conducting studies with people.

期刊最新文献

The risky success of a mindless automatism Reflexive ecologies of knowledge in the future of AI & Society Leveraging teleological explanation to support general-purpose AI assessment The machine in the manuscript: editorial dilemmas AI, society, and the shadows of our desires