Study finds Wikipedia influences judicial behavior

This is why in itself Wikipedia cannot be a trusted source but should be treated as purely, an extension of the media. They choose who they can cite and who they cannot.

Re: Study finds Wikipedia influences judicial behavior

#5

Post by nehalem » Sun, Jul 31, 2022, 11:26 AM UTC

amriksohata wrote: post #4

This is why in itself Wikipedia cannot be a trusted source but should be treated as purely, an extension of the media. They choose who they can cite and who they cannot.

Could you elaborate? I do see the issue about reliability, but I don’t see how this study is related? They added a random selection of cases and provided summaries without intentional bias. Except for a complete set, this is always the case for every database of cases.

Re: Study finds Wikipedia influences judicial behavior

#6

Post by exadrid » Sun, Jul 31, 2022, 11:39 AM UTC

amriksohata wrote: post #4

This is why in itself Wikipedia cannot be a trusted source but should be treated as purely, an extension of the media. They choose who they can cite and who they cannot.

Wikipedia has a very clear pro-science and pro-reality bias, and that's a good thing. You would not want news like OAN to be cited on their.

Re: Study finds Wikipedia influences judicial behavior

#7

Post by helsinkiandrew » Sun, Jul 31, 2022, 11:43 AM UTC

This is alarming but I'm not sure the study actually finds that "Wikipedia influences judicial behavior" in the way most readers would understand that term - influencing decisions and sentence.

It finds that "Getting a public Wikipedia article increased a case’s citations by more than 20 percent." That could mean judges are citing cases with wikipedia entries rather than similar cases without and their judicial behaviour remains the same.

Re: Study finds Wikipedia influences judicial behavior

#8

Post by coffeeblack » Sun, Jul 31, 2022, 11:44 AM UTC

exadrid wrote: post #6

amriksohata wrote: post #4

This is why in itself Wikipedia cannot be a trusted source but should be treated as purely, an extension of the media. They choose who they can cite and who they cannot.

Wikipedia has a very clear pro-science and pro-reality bias, and that's a good thing. You would not want news like OAN to be cited on their.

The problem is that the news sources that Wp trusts have gone completely bananas over the past decade.

Re: Study finds Wikipedia influences judicial behavior

#9

Post by feet » Sun, Jul 31, 2022, 11:49 AM UTC

helsinkiandrew wrote: post #7

This is alarming but I'm not sure the study actually finds that "Wikipedia influences judicial behavior" in the way most readers would understand that term - influencing decisions and sentence. It finds that "Getting a public Wikipedia article increased a case’s citations by more than 20 percent." That could mean judges are citing cases with wikipedia entries rather than similar cases without and their judicial behav…

My guess is that law clerks are using wikipedia as an easy way to find info on cases, which isn't entirely surprising to me

Re: Study finds Wikipedia influences judicial behavior

#10

Post by tomrod » Sun, Jul 31, 2022, 11:50 AM UTC

coffeeblack wrote: post #8

exadrid wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wikipedia has a very clear pro-science and pro-reality bias, and that's a good thing. You would not want news like OAN to be cited on their.

The problem is that the news sources that Wp trusts have gone completely bananas over the past decade.

Citation, please.