A Survey of Lay People's Willingness to Generate Legal Advice using Large Language Models (LLMs)

As of November 2022—following the release of OpenAI’s ChatGPT—the general public’s awareness of generative AI, and specifically Large Language Models (LLMs) has increased. LLMs such as ChatGPT now have the capability to generate text indistinguishable from human authored text, which comes with numerous risks. In this paper, we investigate public perception and willingness to use LLMs as a substitute for legal advice from legal professionals. Our findings show that while few people have used it for this purpose, the willingness to rely on LLMs in the future is growing. Interestingly, this depends on the specific area of law, and while LLMs are perceived to be highly valuable in relation to topics such as tenancy and tax law, they seem to be perceived as less valuable in contexts such as divorce or civil disputes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2024-09-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3686038.3686043
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
11.16

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Survey of Lay People's Willingness to Generate Legal Advice using Large Language Models (LLMs)

Horia A. Maior, Eike Schneiders, Jérémie Clos, Natalie Leesakul et al.
5 citations
Artificial Intelligence in Law
11.16
article

A Survey of Lay People's Willingness to Generate Legal Advice using Large Language Models (LLMs)

Horia A. Maior, Eike Schneiders, Jérémie Clos, Natalie Leesakul, Liz Dowthwaite, Tina Seabrooke, Joshua Krook, Joel E. Fischer
article en
5 citations

Abstract

As of November 2022—following the release of OpenAI’s ChatGPT—the general public’s awareness of generative AI, and specifically Large Language Models (LLMs) has increased. LLMs such as ChatGPT now have the capability to generate text indistinguishable from human authored text, which comes with numerous risks. In this paper, we investigate public perception and willingness to use LLMs as a substitute for legal advice from legal professionals. Our findings show that while few people have used it for this purpose, the willingness to rely on LLMs in the future is growing. Interestingly, this depends on the specific area of law, and while LLMs are perceived to be highly valuable in relation to topics such as tenancy and tax law, they seem to be perceived as less valuable in contexts such as divorce or civil disputes.

University of Nottingham (GB), University of Antwerp (BE), University of Southampton (GB)
UK Research and Innovation, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Artificial Intelligence in Law
11.16
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.