Abstract
Studies on the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the public sector are on the rise. However, there is still a lack of depth concerning specific government segments, such as in the field of justice. In this sense, this work seeks to understand the evolution of the use of AI in Justice and its future perspectives. The authors carried out a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) with a bibliometric analysis of 69 articles collected in the Scopus and Web of Science databases, without a time frame. The categorized results demonstrate stability in productivity between 1988 and 2014 and substantial growth from 2015 onwards. There is also a clear interaction between sub-themes relating to AI and judicialization, including Knowledge-based Systems, Online Dispute Resolution, Algorithmic Surveillance, Decision Support Systems, and Machine Learning Explainable. Thus, the authors expect that this SLR will contribute to the advancement of studies on AI in Justice, subsidize the management of public policies aimed at the justice system, and guide managers in the production chain.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Data availability
The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
References
Aguinis H, Ramani RS, Villamor I (2019) The first 20 years of organizational research methods: trajectory, impact, and predictions for the future. Organ Res Methods 22(2):463–489. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428118786564
Aguinis H, Ramani RS, Alabduljader N (2020) Best-practice recommendations for producers, evaluators, and users of methodological literature reviews. Organ Res Methods. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120943281
Akinyokun OC (1988) A framework for computer aided investigation of crime in developing countries. Inf Technol Dev 3(2):101–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.1988.9627118
Alarie B, Niblett A, Yoon AH (2018) How artificial intelligence will affect the practice of law. Univ Toronto Law J 68:106–124. https://doi.org/10.3138/utlj.2017-0052
Aletras N, Tsarapatsanis D, Preoţiuc-Pietro D, Lampos V (2016) Predicting judicial decisions of the European court of human rights: a natural language processing perspective. PeerJ Comput Sci. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.93
Altbach PG (2007) The imperial tongue: English as the dominating academic language. Economic and political Weekly, 3608–3611. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40276356
American Psychological Association. (2012) Manual de Publicação da APA (6th ed.). Penso Editora. https://books.google.com.br/books?id=wYOjDgAAQBAJ
Anandanpillai T, Barta TA (1999) A case-based reasoning system for housing discrimination law. Expert Syst Appl 16(3):315–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0957-4174(98)00080-3
Arditi D, Pulket T (2010) Predicting the outcome of construction litigation using an integrated artificial intelligence model. J Comput Civ Eng 24(1):73–80. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3801(2010)24:1(73)
Arditi D, Tokdemir OB (1999) Comparison of case-based reasoning and artificial neural networks. J Comput Civ Eng 13(3):162–169. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3801(1999)13:3(162)
Aria M, Cuccurullo C (2017) Bibliometrix: an R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. J Informet 11(4):959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
Ashley KD (2009) Teaching a process model of legal argument with hypotheticals. Artif Intell Law 17(4):321–370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-009-9083-y
Awad E, Levine S, Kleiman-Weiner M, Dsouza S, Tenenbaum JB, Shariff A, Bonnefon JF, Rahwan I (2020) Drivers are blamed more than their automated cars when both make mistakes. Nat Hum Behav 4(2):134–143. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0762-8
Bagherian-Marandi N, Ravanshadnia M, Akbarzadeh-T M-RR (2021) Two-layered fuzzy logic-based model for predicting court decisions in construction contract disputes. Artif Intell Law. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-021-09281-9
Bench-Capon T, Prakken H (2010) Using argument schemes for hypothetical reasoning in law. Artif Intell Law 18(2):153–174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-010-9094-8
Beriain IDM (2018) Does the use of risk assessments in sentences respect the right to due process? A critical analysis of the Wisconsin v. Loomis ruling. Law Probab Risk 17(1):45–53. https://doi.org/10.1093/lpr/mgy001
Berk RA (2021) Artificial intelligence, predictive policing, and risk assessment for law enforcement. Ann Rev Criminol 4(1):209–237. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-criminol-051520-012342
Berman E (2020) Individualized suspicion in the age of big data. Iowa Law Rev 105(2):463–506
Berman DH, Hafner CD (1989) The potential of artificial intelligence to help solve the crisis in our legal system. Commun ACM 32(8):928–938. https://doi.org/10.1145/65971.65972
Berryhill J, Heang KK, Clogher R, McBride K (2019) Hello, world: artificial intelligence and its use in the public sector. OECD Obs Public Sect Innov (OPSI) 36:1–148
Binns R (2020) Human judgment in algorithmic loops: individual justice and automated decision-making. Regul Gov. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12358
Boon C, Den Hartog DN, Lepak DP (2019) A systematic review of human resource management systems and their measurement. J Manag 45(6):2498–2537
Borseková K, Klátik J, Koróny S, Krištofík P, Mihók P, Orviský M (2020) Sustainable policy measures based on implementation of digital technologies in corrections: exploratory study from slovakia and beyond. Sustainability (switzerland) 12(20):1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12208643
Branting LK, Pfeifer C, Brown B, Ferro L, Aberdeen J, Weiss B, Pfaff M, Liao B (2021) Scalable and explainable legal prediction. Artif Intell Law 29(2):213–238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-020-09273-1
Campbell RW (2020) Artificial intelligence in the courtroom: the delivery of justice in the age of machine learning. Colo Tech LJ 18:323
Carneiro D, Novais P, Andrade F, Zeleznikow J, Neves J (2014) Online dispute resolution: an artificial intelligence perspective. Artif Intell Rev 41(2):211–240. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-011-9305-z
Casey AJ, Niblett A (2015) The death of rules and standards. SSRN Electron J 92(4):1401–1447. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2693826
Chadegani A, Aghaei, Salehi H, Yunus MM, Farhadi H, Fooladi M, Farhadi M, Ebrahim NA (2013) A comparison between two main academic literature collections: Web of science and scopus databases. Asian Soc Sci 9(5):18–26. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n5p18
Chalkidis I, Androutsopoulos I, Aletras N (2020) Neural legal judgment prediction in English. ACL 2019 - 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Proceedings of the Conference, 4317–4323. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/p19-1424
Chang YW (2022) Capability of non-English-speaking countries for securing a foothold in international journal publishing. J Informet 16(3):101305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2022.101305
Chaphalkar NB, Iyer KC, Patil SK (2015) Prediction of outcome of construction dispute claims using multilayer perceptron neural network model. Int J Project Manage 33(8):1827–1835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.09.002
Chen J-H, Hsu SC (2007) Hybrid ANN-CBR model for disputed change orders in construction projects. Autom Constr 17(1):56–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2007.03.003
Copus R (2020) Statistical precedent: allocating judicial attention. Vanderbilt Law Rev 73:605
Council of Europe (2018) European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ). European Ethical Charter on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Judicial Systems and their environment. Adopted at the 31st plenary meeting of the CEPEJ (Strasbourg, 3–4)
Creswell JW (2014) Research design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches, 4th ed. Sage Publications Ltd, London
Cronin P, Ryan F, Coughlan M (2008) Undertaking a literature review: a step-by-step approach. Br J Nurs 17(1):38–43. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2008.17.1.28059
Čyras V (2007) On formalisation of the goal concept in law. Eng Appl Artif Intell 20(5):601–608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2006.11.010
de Sousa WG, de Melo ERP, Bermejo PHDS, Farias RAS, Gomes AO (2019) How and where is artificial intelligence in the public sector going? a literature review and research agenda. Gov Inf Q. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2019.07.004
de Sousa WG, Fidelis RA, de Souza Bermejo PH, da Silva Gonçalo AG, de Souza Melo B (2022) Artificial intelligence and speedy trial in the judiciary: myth, reality or need? A case study in the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF). Gov Inf Q 39(1):101660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101660
Deeks A (2019) The judicial demand for explainable artificial intelligence. Columbia Law Rev 119(7):1829–1850
Dragoni AF, Nissan E (2004) Salvaging the spirit of the meter-models tradition: a model of belief revision by way of an abstract idealization of response to incoming evidence delivery during the construction of proof in court. Appl Artif Intell 18(3–4):277–303. https://doi.org/10.1080/08839510490279889
El Jelali S, Fersini E, Messina E (2015) Legal retrieval as support to eMediation: matching disputant’s case and court decisions. Artif Intell Law. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-015-9162-1
Emmert-Streib F, Yli-Harja O, Dehmer M (2020) Explainable artificial intelligence and machine learning: a reality rooted perspective. Wiley Interdiscip Rev 10(6):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/widm.1368
Engstrom DF, Gelbach JB (2020) Legal tech, civil procedure, and the future of adversarialism. Univ Pennsylvania Law Rev 169:1–62
Ferns WJ (1996) An expert system for juvenile delinquent disposition advisement. Appl Artif Intell 10(4):329–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/088395196118533
Fosso Wamba S, Bawack RE, Guthrie C, Queiroz MM, Carillo KDA (2021) Are we preparing for a good AI society? A bibliometric review and research agenda. Technol Forecast Soc Change. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120482
Frankenreiter J, Livermore MA (2020) Computational methods in legal analysis. Annu Rev Law and Soc Sci 16(1):39–57. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-052720-121843
Friedman L (1989) Litigation and society. Ann Rev Sociol 15(1):17–29. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.15.1.17
Gabriel I (2022) Toward a theory of justice for artificial intelligence. Daedalus 151(2):218–231
Gerber MS (2014) Predicting crime using Twitter and kernel density estimation. Decis Support Syst 61(1):115–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2014.02.003
Gowder P (2018) Transformative legal technology and the rule of law. Univ Toronto Law J 68:82–105. https://doi.org/10.3138/utlj.2017-0047
Guimaraes TA, Gomes AO, Guarido Filho ER (2018) Administration of justice: an emerging research field. RAUSP Manag J 53(3):476–482. https://doi.org/10.1108/RAUSP-04-2018-010
Gusenbauer M (2019) Google Scholar to overshadow them all? Comparing the sizes of 12 academic search engines and bibliographic databases. Scientometrics 118:177–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2958-5
Hafner CD, Berman DH (2002) The role of context in case-based legal reasoning: teleological, temporal, and procedural. Artif Intell Law 10(1–3):19–64. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019516031847
Hardcastle VG (2020) Group-to-individual (G2i) inferences: challenges in modeling how the U.S. court system uses brain data. Artif Intell Law 28(1):51–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-018-9234-0
Hartmann K, Wenzelburger G (2021) Uncertainty, risk and the use of algorithms in policy decisions: a case study on criminal justice in the USA. Policy Sci 54(2):269–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-020-09414-y
Hauck RV, Atabakhsh H, Ongvasith P, Gupta H, Chen H (2002) Using coplink to analyze criminal-justice data. Computer 35(3):30–37. https://doi.org/10.1109/2.989927
Hayward KJ, Maas MM (2021) Artificial intelligence and crime: a primer for criminologists. Crime Media Cult 17(2):209–233. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741659020917434
Horty JF, Bench-Capon TJM (2012) A factor-based definition of precedential constraint. Artif Intell Law 20(2):181–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-012-9125-8
Kazim E, Koshiyama AS (2021) A high-level overview of AI ethics. Patterns. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2021.100314
King TC, Aggarwal N, Taddeo M, Floridi L (2020) Artificial intelligence crime: an interdisciplinary analysis of foreseeable threats and solutions. Sci Eng Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-018-00081-0
Knight PT (2014) Where next for EAP? World J English Lang 4(2):1–6. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v4n2p1
Kolodner JL (1992) An introduction to case-based reasoning. Artif Intell Rev 6(1):3–34. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.4.5576.398
Kosta E (2020) Algorithmic state surveillance: challenging the notion of agency in human rights. Regul Gov. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12331
Krupiy TT (2020) A vulnerability analysis: theorising the impact of artificial intelligence decision-making processes on individuals, society and human diversity from a social justice perspective. Computer Law Secur Rev. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2020.105429
Li L, Zhao L, Nai P, Tao X (2021) Charge prediction modeling with interpretation enhancement driven by double-layer criminal system. World Wide Web. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11280-021-00873-8
Liu SM, Kim Y (2018) Special issue on internet plus government: new opportunities to solve public problems? Gov Inf Q 35(1):88–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2018.01.004
López-Robles JR, Cobo MJ, Gutiérrez-Salcedo M, Martínez-Sánchez MA, Gamboa-Rosales NK, Herrera-Viedma E (2021) 30th anniversary of applied intelligence: a combination of bibliometrics and thematic analysis using SciMAT. Appl Intell 51(9):6547–6568. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-021-02584-z
Mahfouz T, Kandil A (2012) Litigation outcome prediction of differing site condition disputes through machine learning models. J Comput Civ Eng 26(3):298–308. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)cp.1943-5487.0000148
Mahfouz T, Kandil A, Davlyatov S (2018) Identification of latent legal knowledge in differing site condition (DSC) litigations. Autom Constr 94:104–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2018.06.011
Malhotra NK (2011) Pesquisa de Marketing: Foco na Decisão (3rd ed.). Pearson Universidades
Mandal A, Ghosh K, Ghosh S, Mandal S (2021) Unsupervised approaches for measuring textual similarity between legal court case reports. Artif Intell Law 29(3):417–451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-020-09280-2
Martín-Martín A, Orduna-Malea E, Thelwall M, López-Cózar ED (2018) Google scholar, web of science, and scopus: a systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories. J Informet 12(4):1160–1177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.09.002
Moens M-F, De Busser R (2002) First steps in building a model for the retrieval of court decisions. Int J Hum Comput Stud 57(5):429–446. https://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.2002.1029
Mumcuoğlu E, Öztürk CE, Ozaktas HM, Koç A (2021) Natural language processing in law: prediction of outcomes in the higher courts of Turkey. Inf Process Manage. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2021.102684
Narayanan A, Hibbin S (2001) Can animations be safely used in court? Artif Intell Law 9(4):271–294. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013866317222
Nissan E (2018) Computer tools and techniques for lawyers and the judiciary. Cybern Syst 49(4):201–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/01969722.2018.1447766
Paul J, Criado AR (2020) The art of writing literature review: what do we know and what do we need to know? Int Bus Rev 29(4):101717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2020.101717
Peng D, Wu Q (2020) LegalCap: a model for complex case discrimination based on capsule neural network. Soft Comput 24(21):16043–16055. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-020-04922-8
Pranckute R (2021) Web of Science (WoS) and scopus: the titans of bibliographic information in today’s academic world. Publications 9:12. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9010012
Pulket T, Arditi D (2009) Universal prediction model for construction litigation. J Comput Civ Eng 23(3):178–187. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0887-3801(2009)23:3(178)
Rafanelli LM (2022) Justice, Injustice, and Artificial Intelligence: lessons from political theory and philosophy. Big Data Soc. https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517221080676
Raghupathi V, Zhou Y, Raghupathi W (2018) Legal decision support: exploring big data analytics approach to modeling pharma patent validity cases. IEEE Access 6:41518–41528. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2859052
Rudin C (2019) Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead. Nat Mach Intell 1(5):206–215. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0048-x
Rule C (2020) Online dispute resolution and the future of justice. Annual Rev Law Soc Sci 16(1):277–292. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-101518-043049
Sadek MT (2010) O sistema de justiça [online]. Rio de Janeiro: Centro Edelstein de Pesquisas Sociais, p. 137. Available from SciELO Books. http://books.scielo.org
Sert MF, Yıldırım E, Haşlak İ (2021) Using artificial intelligence to predict decisions of the Turkish constitutional court. Soc Sci Comput Rev. https://doi.org/10.1177/08944393211010398
Simkova N, Smutny Z (2021) Business E-NeGotiAtion: a method using a genetic algorithm for online dispute resolution in B2B relationships. J Theor Appl Electron Commer Res 16(5):1186–1216. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer16050067
Song Y, Wei Z (2021) Inferring association between alcohol addiction and defendant’s emotion based on sound at court. Front Psychol 12:1–9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.669780
Sushina T, Sobenin A (2020). Artificial Intelligence in the Criminal Justice System: Leading Trends and Possibilities. In 6th International Conference on Social, economic, and academic leadership (ICSEAL-6–2019) (pp. 432–437). Atlantis Press
Volokh E (2019) Chief justice robots. Duke LJ 68:1135
Wallace A (2017) The impact of technology on courts. Int J Court Adm 8(2):1. https://doi.org/10.18352/ijca.236
Waltman L (2016) A review of the literature on citation impact indicators. J Inform 10(2):365–391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.007
Wirtz BW, Langer PF, Fenner C (2021) Artificial intelligence in the public sector—a research agenda. Int J Public Adm 44(13):1103–1128. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2021.1947319
Xiao C, Hu X, Liu Z, Tu C, Sun M (2021) Lawformer: a pre-trained language model for Chinese legal long documents. AI Open 2:79–84
Zhang N, Pu YF, Yang S, Gao J, Wang Z, Zhou JL (2018) A Chinese legal intelligent auxiliary discretionary adviser based on GA-BP NNs. Electronic Library 36(6):1135–1153. https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-03-2017-0056
Zhong H, Xiao C, Tu C, Zhang T, Liu Z, Sun M (2020) How does NLP benefit legal system: a summary of legal artificial intelligence. In: proceedings of the 58th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics, 5218–5230. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.466
Zuiderwijk A, Chen YC, Salem F (2021) Implications of the use of artificial intelligence in public governance: a systematic literature review and a research agenda. Gov Inf Q. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101577
Zupic I, Čater T (2015) Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organ Res Methods 18(3):429–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper and that the research does not involve Human Participants and/or Animals.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
de Oliveira, L.F., da Silva Gomes, A., Enes, Y. et al. Path and future of artificial intelligence in the field of justice: a systematic literature review and a research agenda. SN Soc Sci 2, 180 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-022-00482-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-022-00482-w