Ten Years of Mixed Tribunals in Argentina

Bergoglio, María Inés

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2987942

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Surveys in the US have consistently found broad public support for juries as an institution ("diffuse support") [65] that compares the perceived legitimacy of juries to judges [82,126]. Nevertheless, surveys tend to show a preference for juries over judges [126] and some empirical evidence of perceived legitimacy benefits of citizen participation have been noted in multiple countries [17,99].…”

Section: Automated Decision Makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing the Perceived Legitimacy of Content Moderation Processes: Contractors, Algorithms, Expert Panels, and Digital Juries

Pan,

Yakhmi,

Iyer

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While research continues to investigate and improve the accuracy, fairness, and normative appropriateness of content moderation processes on large social media platforms, even the best process cannot be effective if users reject its authority as illegitimate. We present a survey experiment comparing the perceived institutional legitimacy of four popular content moderation processes. We conducted a within-subjects experiment in which we showed US Facebook users moderation decisions and randomized the description of whether those decisions were made by paid contractors, algorithms, expert panels, or juries of users. Prior work suggests that juries will have the highest perceived legitimacy due to the benefits of judicial independence and democratic representation. However, expert panels had greater perceived legitimacy than algorithms or juries. Moreover, outcome alignment-agreement with the decision-played a larger role than process in determining perceived legitimacy. These results suggest benefits to incorporating expert oversight in content moderation and underscore that any process will face legitimacy challenges derived from disagreement about outcomes.CCS Concepts: • Human-centered computing → Empirical studies in collaborative and social computing.

show abstract

Section: Automated Decision Makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing the Perceived Legitimacy of Content Moderation Processes: Contractors, Algorithms, Expert Panels, and Digital Juries

Pan,

Yakhmi,

Iyer

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Amietta's research revealed that jurors understood themselves as sharing the “attributes of a judge” (15) and could assert their opinions in cases of disagreement (23). María Inés Bergoglio's () work in Córdoba similarly suggested that jurors felt respected and “able to take part in the tribunal's deliberation” without undue judicial influence (6).…”

Section: Toward An Ethnographic Study Of the Judge‐as‐peermentioning

confidence: 99%

The Jury Is Out: An Ethnographic Study of Lay Participation in the Norwegian Legal System

Offit

2018

PoLAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this article is to explore perceptions and assessments of lay participation in Norway during a historic time of transition away from all‐layperson juries. This study consisted of sixteen months of court observation and interviews with judges, prosecutors, former lay decision makers, defense attorneys, and other contributors to the country's longstanding jury debate. My ethnographic research demonstrates that all‐layperson juries in Norway face practical and procedural checks that differentiate them from Anglo‐American juries, among others. For this reason, legal professionals in Norway evince confidence that mixed courts of lay and professional citizens can facilitate fair case outcomes. A central finding from this research is that comparative analyses of all‐layperson juries and mixed courts require attention to the social specificity of the states that support such systems. To this end, lay participation in Norway challenges the conventional wisdom that jurors have greater independence and control over case outcomes than lay judges.

show abstract

Dismissing the Jury

Offit¹

2021

Juries, Lay Judges, and Mixed Courts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Ten Years of Mixed Tribunals in Argentina

Cited by 3 publications

References 17 publications

Comparing the Perceived Legitimacy of Content Moderation Processes: Contractors, Algorithms, Expert Panels, and Digital Juries

Comparing the Perceived Legitimacy of Content Moderation Processes: Contractors, Algorithms, Expert Panels, and Digital Juries

The Jury Is Out: An Ethnographic Study of Lay Participation in the Norwegian Legal System

Dismissing the Jury

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About