Public Perceptions of Judges’ Use of AI Tools in Courtroom Decision-Making: An Examination of Legitimacy, Fairness, Trust, and Procedural Justice

This study examines the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in judicial decision-making, focusing on bail and sentencing contexts. We examined public perceptions of judges who use AI tools compared to those who rely solely on expertise. Using an experimental design, participants (N = 1800; stratified by race/ethnicity and gender) were presented with vignettes depicting judges using varying levels of AI assistance. Key outcomes included perceptions of judicial legitimacy, procedural justice, and trust in AI, with analyses stratified by racial groups (Black, Hispanic, White). The results revealed that judges relying on expertise were generally rated higher in legitimacy than those using AI; however, significant racial differences emerged. Black participants showed greater trust and perceived fairness in AI-augmented decisions compared to White and Hispanic participants. Open-ended responses further highlighted social psychological themes regarding the symbolic meaning of AI in judicial processes. These findings underscore the complexity of integrating AI in the judiciary, emphasizing the need for transparent and equitable implementation strategies to maintain public trust and fairness. Future research should explore underlying factors influencing these perceptions to inform policies that address racial disparities and enhance trust in AI-assisted legal decision-making.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Behavioral Sciences
Published
2025-04-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15040476
Citations
12
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
102.27

Funders

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

Public Perceptions of Judges’ Use of AI Tools in Courtroom Decision-Making: An Examination of Legitimacy, Fairness, Trust, and Procedural Justice

Emily R. Berthelot, Shawn Marsh, Anna Fine
12 citations
Behavioral Sciences
Artificial Intelligence in Law
102.27
article

Public Perceptions of Judges’ Use of AI Tools in Courtroom Decision-Making: An Examination of Legitimacy, Fairness, Trust, and Procedural Justice

Emily R. Berthelot, Shawn Marsh, Anna Fine
article en
12 citations

Abstract

This study examines the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in judicial decision-making, focusing on bail and sentencing contexts. We examined public perceptions of judges who use AI tools compared to those who rely solely on expertise. Using an experimental design, participants (N = 1800; stratified by race/ethnicity and gender) were presented with vignettes depicting judges using varying levels of AI assistance. Key outcomes included perceptions of judicial legitimacy, procedural justice, and trust in AI, with analyses stratified by racial groups (Black, Hispanic, White). The results revealed that judges relying on expertise were generally rated higher in legitimacy than those using AI; however, significant racial differences emerged. Black participants showed greater trust and perceived fairness in AI-augmented decisions compared to White and Hispanic participants. Open-ended responses further highlighted social psychological themes regarding the symbolic meaning of AI in judicial processes. These findings underscore the complexity of integrating AI in the judiciary, emphasizing the need for transparent and equitable implementation strategies to maintain public trust and fairness. Future research should explore underlying factors influencing these perceptions to inform policies that address racial disparities and enhance trust in AI-assisted legal decision-making.

Behavioral SciencesVol. 15(4)
University of Nevada, Reno (US)
University of Nevada, Reno
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Artificial Intelligence in Law
102.27
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.