Public Perceptions of Judicial Use of AI: A Legal & Psychological Perspective

Abstract

Research on the judicial use of AI has primarily focused on general attitudes toward algorithmic decision-making, leaving open the question of how specific policy choices shape public perceptions of the courts. This chapter addresses this gap through a comparative analysis of judicial AI policies across four major jurisdictions: the European Union, United Kingdom, United States, and China. We identify three key dimensions along which these approaches differ: the choice between hard law and soft law, transparency requirements, and restrictions on substantive versus administrative use. Drawing on insights from rational choice theory and behavioural economics, we analyse how each regulatory choice might influence public trust and legitimacy. Our analysis suggests that the effectiveness of different approaches likely depends on institutional fit, including the pre-existing legal culture, levels of trust in courts and technology, and broader societal attitudes toward automation. These findings help explain the emergence of divergent regulatory approaches across jurisdictions and offer insights for policymakers seeking to maintain public confidence in the courts while integrating AI into judicial systems.

Keywords: Public Perceptions, Trust in the Courts, Judicial use of AI, Judges