Wikipedia: Swaying the Scales of Justice?
July 2022
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)

Introduction
Dive into the curious world of how Wikipedia, the internet’s encyclopedia anyone can edit, is unexpectedly swaying the decisions of judges in court! Researchers from the prestigious MIT embarked on a quirky experiment, crafting over 150 new legal Wikipedia articles to see if they'd influence judicial rulings. Spoiler: They did, and significantly so, especially in lower courts. This study not only sheds light on Wikipedia's power but also sparks a conversation on ensuring the reliability of such accessible information. Ready to explore how a simple online search can tip the scales of justice?
READ FULL ARTICLEWhy It Matters
Discover how this topic shapes your world and future
Navigating the Digital Influence on Justice
Imagine living in a world where your favorite online encyclopedia influences some of the most critical decisions in courtrooms. Sounds like a plot from a futuristic novel, right? Yet, this is our reality. The recent study revealing Wikipedia's impact on judicial behavior is a wake-up call, highlighting the digital age's profound influence on traditional systems like the judiciary. This matters because it underscores the interconnectedness of information, technology, and law, shaping not just legal outcomes but potentially the very fabric of justice itself. For you, budding scholars and digital natives, this revelation invites a deeper reflection on how digital resources, often taken for granted, play significant roles in critical societal functions. It's a fascinating intersection of law, technology, and information quality that beckons your curiosity and critical thinking, potentially steering the course of your future studies or even career paths.
Speak like a Scholar

Randomized field experiment
A study where participants are randomly assigned to a group to test a specific intervention or treatment in a real-world setting. Think of it as flipping a coin to decide which group each participant belongs to, ensuring fairness and reliability in the results.

Causation vs. correlation
Causation means one event causes another, while correlation indicates a relationship between two events but doesn't prove one causes the other. Picture causation as a domino effect, where one domino falling causes the next to fall, while correlation is like noticing that ice cream sales and shark attacks both increase in the summer without one causing the other.

Precedent
A legal principle or rule established in a previous legal case that is either binding on or persuasive for a court when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts. Imagine if your older sibling convinced your parents to extend their curfew at 16, and you use that decision to argue for your own extended curfew.

Natural language processing (NLP)
A branch of artificial intelligence that helps computers understand, interpret, and produce human language. Think of it as teaching a robot to understand and speak human languages.

Statistical significance
A measure that indicates how likely it is that the findings from a study are due to chance. It's like confirming that finding a four-leaf clover in your backyard isn't just luck because you've found one there every day for a week.

Hierarchical court structure
A system where courts are organized in levels, with higher courts having the authority to review decisions made by lower courts. Picture a pyramid, with the Supreme Court at the top and various levels of lower courts below it.
Independent Research Ideas

The role of digital platforms in shaping public legal education
Investigate how platforms like YouTube or podcasts contribute to or detract from public understanding of legal concepts.

Comparative analysis of online vs. traditional legal research methods among law students
Examine preferences, perceptions of reliability, and outcomes between these two research methods.

The impact of social media on jury decisions
Analyze whether and how information from social media platforms can influence jury members' opinions and verdicts.

Artificial intelligence in predicting legal outcomes
Explore the potential of AI systems to accurately predict court decisions based on historical data.

The ethics of anonymously sourced information in judicial decisions
Delve into the ethical implications of using information from platforms like Wikipedia, where the authorship and credibility of content are not always clear.
Related Articles

Your Car: The Undercover Gossip
October 2023
The University of Sydney

Internet's Fate: A Legal Showdown
February 2024
University of Pennsylvania

Roe Overturned: What's Next?
June 2022
The Conversation

AI Uncovers Bias in Jury Picks
July 2023
Cornell University

TikTok's Secret Bias Unveiled
October 2023
University of Pennsylvania