可信，未必正确：Reddit用户如何验证AI生成的法律建议
Credible, Not Always Correct: How Reddit Users Verify AI-Generated Legal Advice
AI总结：
本文通过分析Reddit平台的用户叙事与社区反应，揭示AI生成法律建议的可信度源于社会建构而非准确性，多数用户仅凭其形式与情感安慰就采纳，少数采用分布式法律咨询的验证方式。
AI中文摘要：
在司法获取机会持续不足的背景下，普通民众越来越多地使用大语言模型（LLMs）解决实际法律问题。本文提供的证据表明，AI生成法律建议的实际效力并不取决于其准确性，而取决于其可信度的社会建构。现有研究已评估了法律AI的准确性，但对于机器生成的指导意见如何被验证并获得足够可信度，使普通用户能够据此采取行动，人们知之甚少。本文通过对153篇Reddit叙事帖和5341条社区反应的双方法分析，绘制了一系列验证实践的图谱。在一端，少数用户通过在不同模型间交叉验证来验证AI生成的法律建议，还有一些用户在行动前将AI生成的指导意见提交给平台社区评估，这种配置我们称之为分布式法律咨询。然而，更常见的情况是，相关叙事帖未提及验证过程，用户仅凭借其类似律师的形式和情感安慰就采取了行动。这些发现表明，AI辅助的法律自助服务在一个新兴的非正式基础设施中运作，该基础设施将验证工作重新分配给最无力承担此项工作的人群。
英文摘要：
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used by laypeople to resolve real legal problems, against a backdrop of persistent access-to-justice deficits. This article presents evidence that the practical force of AI-generated legal advice depends not on its accuracy but on the social production of its credibility. While existing research has assessed the accuracy of legal AI, less is known about how machine-generated guidance is verified and made credible enough for lay users to act on. Drawing on a dual-method analysis of 153 Reddit narratives and 5,341 community reactions, this article maps a spectrum of verification practices. At one end, a minority of users verify AI-generated legal advice by triangulating across models, and some submit AI-generated guidance to platform communities for evaluation before acting, a configuration we term distributed counsel. Far more commonly, however, narratives are silent on verification. AI-generated legal advice is acted on the strength of its lawyer-like form and emotional reassurance alone. These findings show that AI-assisted legal self-help operates within an emerging informal infrastructure which redistributes the work of verification to those least equipped to bear it.
