Automate or Assist? The Role of Computational Models in Identifying Gendered Discourse in US Capital Trial Transcripts
0
🌿
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This paper explores the use of computational models to identify gendered discourse in US capital trial transcripts.
- The researchers investigate the role of automated methods versus human-assisted approaches in detecting gender biases in legal proceedings.
- The study analyzes the performance and limitations of various natural language processing techniques in uncovering gender-related patterns in court transcripts.
Plain English Explanation
The researchers in this study wanted to understand how well computers can identify gender-based language and biases in court transcripts from US capital trials. They compared different computational methods, including automated systems and human-assisted approaches, to see which ones work best for detecting gendered discourse in these legal documents.
The goal was to explore the potential and limitations of using machine learning and natural language processing to uncover gender-related patterns in the language used during high-stakes legal proceedings. This could help shed light on potential biases and disparities in how men and women are portrayed and treated in the criminal justice system.
The paper related to gender bias detection in Brazilian court decisions provides a useful comparison, as it looks at a similar issue in a different legal context. Another related study examines how large language models can be used to measure gender representation and biases in various types of text.
Technical Explanation
The researchers used a combination of automated text analysis techniques and human-annotated data to examine gendered language patterns in US capital trial transcripts. They leveraged large language models for judicial entity extraction and investigated potential annotator biases in their approach.
The study design involved training machine learning models to classify speaker gender based on linguistic features, as well as having human coders manually label a subset of the transcripts. The researchers then compared the performance of the automated and human-assisted methods, exploring the strengths and limitations of each approach.
Key insights from the technical analysis include the challenges of accurately identifying gender in legal discourse, the importance of considering contextual factors beyond just lexical cues, and the need for careful validation of automated systems to mitigate potential biases. The findings also highlight the value of leveraging large language models in STEM education to address gender gaps.
Critical Analysis
The paper acknowledges several caveats and limitations of the study, such as the small sample size, the potential for selection bias in the transcript corpus, and the inherent complexities of gender identification in formal legal settings. The authors also note the need for further research to validate the generalizability of their findings and to explore more nuanced approaches to detecting gendered language patterns.
One area that could be further explored is the potential impact of intersectional factors, such as race and socioeconomic status, on how gender is portrayed and perceived in capital trials. Additionally, the researchers could investigate the extent to which their findings align with or diverge from analyses of gender biases in other legal contexts, such as civil trials or administrative proceedings.
Overall, the study provides a valuable contribution to the ongoing discussion around the role of computational methods in identifying and addressing gender-related issues within the criminal justice system. However, it is essential to maintain a critical, nuanced perspective and to continue exploring the limitations and potential unintended consequences of automated approaches in this sensitive domain.
Conclusion
This research examines the use of computational models to detect gendered discourse in US capital trial transcripts, comparing automated methods with human-assisted approaches. The findings highlight the challenges of accurately identifying gender-based language patterns in formal legal settings and the need for careful validation of any automated systems used for this purpose.
The study underscores the potential value of leveraging natural language processing and machine learning techniques to uncover potential biases in the criminal justice system, but also cautions against over-reliance on these methods. Ongoing collaboration between researchers, domain experts, and affected communities is crucial to ensure that any such tools are developed and deployed responsibly and equitably.
As the use of artificial intelligence and machine learning becomes more widespread, it is essential to maintain a critical and nuanced understanding of their capabilities and limitations, particularly in high-stakes domains like the legal system. This research contributes to that important dialogue and points the way toward further exploration of these issues.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
🌿
0
Automate or Assist? The Role of Computational Models in Identifying Gendered Discourse in US Capital Trial Transcripts
Andrea W Wen-Yi, Kathryn Adamson, Nathalie Greenfield, Rachel Goldberg, Sandra Babcock, David Mimno, Allison Koenecke
The language used by US courtroom actors in criminal trials has long been studied for biases. However, systematic studies for bias in high-stakes court trials have been difficult, due to the nuanced nature of bias and the legal expertise required. Large language models offer the possibility to automate annotation. But validating the computational approach requires both an understanding of how automated methods fit in existing annotation workflows and what they really offer. We present a case study of adding a computational model to a complex and high-stakes problem: identifying gender-biased language in US capital trials for women defendants. Our team of experienced death-penalty lawyers and NLP technologists pursue a three-phase study: first annotating manually, then training and evaluating computational models, and finally comparing expert annotations to model predictions. Unlike many typical NLP tasks, annotating for gender bias in months-long capital trials is complicated, with many individual judgment calls. Contrary to standard arguments for automation that are based on efficiency and scalability, legal experts find the computational models most useful in providing opportunities to reflect on their own bias in annotation and to build consensus on annotation rules. This experience suggests that seeking to replace experts with computational models for complex annotation is both unrealistic and undesirable. Rather, computational models offer valuable opportunities to assist the legal experts in annotation-based studies.
Read more7/30/2024
0
Gender Bias Detection in Court Decisions: A Brazilian Case Study
Raysa Benatti, Fabiana Severi, Sandra Avila, Esther Luna Colombini
Data derived from the realm of the social sciences is often produced in digital text form, which motivates its use as a source for natural language processing methods. Researchers and practitioners have developed and relied on artificial intelligence techniques to collect, process, and analyze documents in the legal field, especially for tasks such as text summarization and classification. While increasing procedural efficiency is often the primary motivation behind natural language processing in the field, several works have proposed solutions for human rights-related issues, such as assessment of public policy and institutional social settings. One such issue is the presence of gender biases in court decisions, which has been largely studied in social sciences fields; biased institutional responses to gender-based violence are a violation of international human rights dispositions since they prevent gender minorities from accessing rights and hamper their dignity. Natural language processing-based approaches can help detect these biases on a larger scale. Still, the development and use of such tools require researchers and practitioners to be mindful of legal and ethical aspects concerning data sharing and use, reproducibility, domain expertise, and value-charged choices. In this work, we (a) present an experimental framework developed to automatically detect gender biases in court decisions issued in Brazilian Portuguese and (b) describe and elaborate on features we identify to be critical in such a technology, given its proposed use as a support tool for research and assessment of court~activity.
Read more6/4/2024
0
Decoding Biases: Automated Methods and LLM Judges for Gender Bias Detection in Language Models
Shachi H Kumar, Saurav Sahay, Sahisnu Mazumder, Eda Okur, Ramesh Manuvinakurike, Nicole Beckage, Hsuan Su, Hung-yi Lee, Lama Nachman
Large Language Models (LLMs) have excelled at language understanding and generating human-level text. However, even with supervised training and human alignment, these LLMs are susceptible to adversarial attacks where malicious users can prompt the model to generate undesirable text. LLMs also inherently encode potential biases that can cause various harmful effects during interactions. Bias evaluation metrics lack standards as well as consensus and existing methods often rely on human-generated templates and annotations which are expensive and labor intensive. In this work, we train models to automatically create adversarial prompts to elicit biased responses from target LLMs. We present LLM- based bias evaluation metrics and also analyze several existing automatic evaluation methods and metrics. We analyze the various nuances of model responses, identify the strengths and weaknesses of model families, and assess where evaluation methods fall short. We compare these metrics to human evaluation and validate that the LLM-as-a-Judge metric aligns with human judgement on bias in response generation.
Read more8/9/2024
0
Leveraging Large Language Models to Measure Gender Bias in Gendered Languages
Erik Derner, Sara Sansalvador de la Fuente, Yoan Guti'errez, Paloma Moreda, Nuria Oliver
Gender bias in text corpora used in various natural language processing (NLP) contexts, such as for training large language models (LLMs), can lead to the perpetuation and amplification of societal inequalities. This is particularly pronounced in gendered languages like Spanish or French, where grammatical structures inherently encode gender, making the bias analysis more challenging. Existing methods designed for English are inadequate for this task due to the intrinsic linguistic differences between English and gendered languages. This paper introduces a novel methodology that leverages the contextual understanding capabilities of LLMs to quantitatively analyze gender representation in Spanish corpora. By utilizing LLMs to identify and classify gendered nouns and pronouns in relation to their reference to human entities, our approach provides a nuanced analysis of gender biases. We empirically validate our method on four widely-used benchmark datasets, uncovering significant gender disparities with a male-to-female ratio ranging from 4:1 to 6:1. These findings demonstrate the value of our methodology for bias quantification in gendered languages and suggest its application in NLP, contributing to the development of more equitable language technologies.
Read more6/21/2024