互联网回音室与法官的错误信息:中国法官对公众支持死刑的看法案例

IF 0.9 3区 社会学 Q3 ECONOMICS
Zhuang Liu
{"title":"互联网回音室与法官的错误信息:中国法官对公众支持死刑的看法案例","authors":"Zhuang Liu","doi":"10.1016/j.irle.2021.106028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In authoritarian regimes, without voting as a channel to gather public preferences, online public expression may become a major type of public opinion the government collects. However, online information can be biased and thereby mislead decision-makers. Combining data from a survey of judges and a national population survey, this article provides evidence that i) Chinese judges rely on online public opinion to infer public attitudes toward the death penalty, ii) online information is biased – online opinion is more punitive than the general public opinion, and, iii) biased online information seems to have a strong influence on judges’ perception of strong public support for the death penalty, and this may explain why Chinese scholars, lawyers, and other practitioners have persistently overestimated public punitiveness. The findings reveal a less discussed peril of the internet echo chamber: its misleading effect on the information collection process of the government, especially in autocracies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47202,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Law and Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The internet echo chamber and the misinformation of judges: The case of judges’ perception of public support for the death penalty in China\",\"authors\":\"Zhuang Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.irle.2021.106028\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>In authoritarian regimes, without voting as a channel to gather public preferences, online public expression may become a major type of public opinion the government collects. However, online information can be biased and thereby mislead decision-makers. Combining data from a survey of judges and a national population survey, this article provides evidence that i) Chinese judges rely on online public opinion to infer public attitudes toward the death penalty, ii) online information is biased – online opinion is more punitive than the general public opinion, and, iii) biased online information seems to have a strong influence on judges’ perception of strong public support for the death penalty, and this may explain why Chinese scholars, lawyers, and other practitioners have persistently overestimated public punitiveness. The findings reveal a less discussed peril of the internet echo chamber: its misleading effect on the information collection process of the government, especially in autocracies.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47202,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Review of Law and Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Review of Law and Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0144818821000521\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Law and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0144818821000521","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

在专制政权中,没有投票作为收集公众偏好的渠道,网络公众表达可能成为政府收集民意的主要类型。然而,网上的信息可能有偏见,从而误导决策者。结合法官调查和全国人口调查的数据,本文提供了证据,i)中国法官依赖网络民意来推断公众对死刑的态度,ii)网络信息有偏见-网络民意比一般公众舆论更具惩罚性,iii)有偏见的网络信息似乎对法官对公众强烈支持死刑的看法有很大影响,这可能解释了为什么中国学者,律师,而其他从业者一直高估了公众的惩罚力度。这些发现揭示了互联网回音室的一个较少被讨论的危险:它对政府信息收集过程的误导作用,尤其是在独裁国家。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The internet echo chamber and the misinformation of judges: The case of judges’ perception of public support for the death penalty in China

In authoritarian regimes, without voting as a channel to gather public preferences, online public expression may become a major type of public opinion the government collects. However, online information can be biased and thereby mislead decision-makers. Combining data from a survey of judges and a national population survey, this article provides evidence that i) Chinese judges rely on online public opinion to infer public attitudes toward the death penalty, ii) online information is biased – online opinion is more punitive than the general public opinion, and, iii) biased online information seems to have a strong influence on judges’ perception of strong public support for the death penalty, and this may explain why Chinese scholars, lawyers, and other practitioners have persistently overestimated public punitiveness. The findings reveal a less discussed peril of the internet echo chamber: its misleading effect on the information collection process of the government, especially in autocracies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
18.20%
发文量
38
审稿时长
48 days
期刊介绍: The International Review of Law and Economics provides a forum for interdisciplinary research at the interface of law and economics. IRLE is international in scope and audience and particularly welcomes both theoretical and empirical papers on comparative law and economics, globalization and legal harmonization, and the endogenous emergence of legal institutions, in addition to more traditional legal topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信