Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Artificial intelligence and real decisions : Predictive systems and generative AI vs. emotive-cognitive legal deliberations

Contini, Francesco ; Minissale, Alessandra and Bergman Blix, Stina LU orcid (2024) In Frontiers in Sociology 9.
Abstract
The use of artificial intelligence in law represents one of the biggest challenges across different legal systems. Supporters of predictive systems believe that decisionmaking could be more efficient, consistent and predictable by using AI. European legislation and legal scholars, however, identify areas where AI developments are at high risk or too dangerous to be used in judicial proceedings. In this article, we contribute to this debate by problematizing predictive systems based on previous judgments and the growing use of Generative AI in judicial proceedings. Through illustrations from real criminal cases in Italian courts and prosecution offices, we show misalignments between the functions of AI systems and the essential features of... (More)
The use of artificial intelligence in law represents one of the biggest challenges across different legal systems. Supporters of predictive systems believe that decisionmaking could be more efficient, consistent and predictable by using AI. European legislation and legal scholars, however, identify areas where AI developments are at high risk or too dangerous to be used in judicial proceedings. In this article, we contribute to this debate by problematizing predictive systems based on previous judgments and the growing use of Generative AI in judicial proceedings. Through illustrations from real criminal cases in Italian courts and prosecution offices, we show misalignments between the functions of AI systems and the essential features of legal decision-making and identify possible legitimate usages. We argue that current predictive systems and Generative AI crunch the complexity of judicial proceedings, the dynamics of fact-finding and legal encoding. They reduce the delivery of justice to statistical connections between data or metadata, cutting off the emotive-cognitive process that lies at the core of legal decision-making. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
The use of artificial intelligence in law represents one of the biggest challenges
across different legal systems. Supporters of predictive systems believe that
decisionmaking could be more efficient, consistent and predictable by using
AI. European legislation and legal scholars, however, identify areas where AI
developments are at high risk or too dangerous to be used in judicial proceedings.
In this article, we contribute to this debate by problematizing predictive systems
based on previous judgments and the growing use of Generative AI in judicial
proceedings. Through illustrations from real criminal cases in Italian courts and
prosecution offices, we show misalignments between the functions of AI... (More)
The use of artificial intelligence in law represents one of the biggest challenges
across different legal systems. Supporters of predictive systems believe that
decisionmaking could be more efficient, consistent and predictable by using
AI. European legislation and legal scholars, however, identify areas where AI
developments are at high risk or too dangerous to be used in judicial proceedings.
In this article, we contribute to this debate by problematizing predictive systems
based on previous judgments and the growing use of Generative AI in judicial
proceedings. Through illustrations from real criminal cases in Italian courts and
prosecution offices, we show misalignments between the functions of AI systems
and the essential features of legal decision-making and identify possible legitimate
usages. We argue that current predictive systems and Generative AI crunch the
complexity of judicial proceedings, the dynamics of fact-finding and legal encoding.
They reduce the delivery of justice to statistical connections between data or
metadata, cutting off the emotive-cognitive process that lies at the core of legal
decision-making. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
; and
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
Artificial intelligence, Emotions, Legal Decision-Making, Legal Narratives, Criminal Trials, Sociology (excluding Social Work, Social Psychology and Social Anthropology), Sociologi (exklusive socialt arbete, socialpsykologi och socialantropologi), Other Legal Research, Annan rättsvetenskaplig forskning, Criminology, Kriminologi
in
Frontiers in Sociology
volume
9
publisher
Frontiers Media S. A.
external identifiers
  • scopus:85209394561
ISSN
2297-7775
DOI
10.3389/fsoc.2024.1417766
language
English
LU publication?
no
additional info
Författarna delar förstaförfattarskapet 2025-09-02T14:20:45.731+02:00
id
b731c402-5187-4b49-9240-50e1d6559b25
date added to LUP
2026-01-27 09:34:19
date last changed
2026-07-03 04:48:45
@article{b731c402-5187-4b49-9240-50e1d6559b25,
  abstract     = {{The use of artificial intelligence in law represents one of the biggest challenges across different legal systems. Supporters of predictive systems believe that decisionmaking could be more efficient, consistent and predictable by using AI. European legislation and legal scholars, however, identify areas where AI developments are at high risk or too dangerous to be used in judicial proceedings. In this article, we contribute to this debate by problematizing predictive systems based on previous judgments and the growing use of Generative AI in judicial proceedings. Through illustrations from real criminal cases in Italian courts and prosecution offices, we show misalignments between the functions of AI systems and the essential features of legal decision-making and identify possible legitimate usages. We argue that current predictive systems and Generative AI crunch the complexity of judicial proceedings, the dynamics of fact-finding and legal encoding. They reduce the delivery of justice to statistical connections between data or metadata, cutting off the emotive-cognitive process that lies at the core of legal decision-making.}},
  author       = {{Contini, Francesco and Minissale, Alessandra and Bergman Blix, Stina}},
  issn         = {{2297-7775}},
  keywords     = {{Artificial intelligence; Emotions; Legal Decision-Making; Legal Narratives; Criminal Trials; Sociology (excluding Social Work, Social Psychology and Social Anthropology); Sociologi (exklusive socialt arbete, socialpsykologi och socialantropologi); Other Legal Research; Annan rättsvetenskaplig forskning; Criminology; Kriminologi}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  month        = {{10}},
  publisher    = {{Frontiers Media S. A.}},
  series       = {{Frontiers in Sociology}},
  title        = {{Artificial intelligence and real decisions : Predictive systems and generative AI vs. emotive-cognitive legal deliberations}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2024.1417766}},
  doi          = {{10.3389/fsoc.2024.1417766}},
  volume       = {{9}},
  year         = {{2024}},
}