美国法律意见书文本中的种族偏见趋势
Racial Bias Trends in the Text of US Legal Opinions
AI总结：
本文通过分析1860至2009年超600万件美国法院案件的词嵌入，发现法律意见书中普遍存在将黑人姓名与负面词汇关联的隐性种族偏见，但未发现1950年前后或南北地区间存在显著差异，为制度化种族偏见研究提供了实证基础。
摘要：
尽管人们普遍认识到美国法律中存在种族偏见，但这种偏见如何体现在法律语言（即司法意见书）中，以及它是否随时间段或地区而变化，仍不清楚。基于在大规模语料库中测量隐性种族偏见的方法，我们为1860年至2009年间超过600万件美国联邦和州法院案件近似计算了GloVe词嵌入。我们发现几乎所有地区和时期都存在强有力的种族偏见证据，因为传统上黑人姓名与预先分类的“不愉快”词汇关联更紧密，而传统上白人姓名与预先分类的“愉快”词汇关联更紧密。我们还检验了1950年之前的法律意见书是否比1950年之后的表现出更多的隐性种族偏见，以及南方各州的意见书在种族偏见上的变化是否小于东北部各州。我们没有发现1950年之前的法律意见书中偏见加剧的证据，也没有发现东北部各州的法律意见书随时间推移在种族偏见上表现出比南方各州更大变化的证据。这些结果推动了对制度化种族偏见的进一步研究。
英文摘要：
Although there is widespread recognition of racial bias in US law, it is unclear how such bias appears in the language of law, namely judicial opinions, and whether it varies across time period or region. Building upon approaches for measuring implicit racial bias in large-scale corpora, we approximate GloVe word embeddings for over 6 million US federal and state court cases from 1860 to 2009. We find strong evidence of racial bias across nearly all regions and time periods, as traditionally Black names are more closely associated with pre-classified "unpleasant" terms whereas traditionally White names are more closely associated with pre-classified "pleasant" terms. We also test whether legal opinions before 1950 exhibit more implicit racial bias than those after 1950, as well as whether opinions from Southern states exhibit less change in racial bias than those from Northeastern states. We do not find evidence of elevated bias in legal opinions before 1950, or evidence that legal opinions from Northeastern states show greater change in racial bias over time compared to Southern states. These results motivate further research into institutionalized racial bias.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
