Enhancing citator reports with user generated content
1
Enhancing Citator Reports with User-Generated Content Rachel Gordon, Access Services Librarian, Mercer University, Macon, Georgia AALL Poster #14, July 2013 BACKGROUND • Online citators are a vast improvement over their paper predecessor, but are still so complex that a few hours of instruction in law school hardly prepares attorneys to use them correctly or to their full potential. • I worked in customer support for LexisNexis for 9.5 years. From that experience, I know that attorneys often use citators exactly the way we tell them not to in law school. They think that a red signal means that a case is “bad law.” They do not remember the many times their legal research instructors told them to read the underlying cases, and they’re too busy to do that anyway. • Users end up missing important cases because the warning signal is unrelated to the point of law for which they would have cited the case (absent the warning signal). • Users tend to think in terms of cases when using citators when they should be thinking in terms of points of law. • Users want an easy to use tool that saves them time and money. While a citator can never replace the independent judgment of an attorney, there are ways that online citators can be enhanced to make them more reliable and easier to use. WHY USER-GENERATED CONTENT? What is User-generated content (UGC)? • User-generated content is what it sounds like. It allows users to share their unique insights and experiences to collaborate with others with the goal of improving a product or service. An example of UGC is a product review posted in an online forum or a store website. Benefits of adding UGC to citator reports: • Provides analysis to help explain intricacies of a report or the reason for a signal. • Meets changing user expectations for interactivity and ease of use. • Makes better use of existing resources - customer-facing editor explanations may already exist in different formats. • Inexpensive to implement and support as the role of editors expands slightly to include reviewing and approving content submitted by users. • Users retain their independent judgment and can decide whether to participate and whether to utilize the content submitted by others. SAMPLE CONFUSING REPORT Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) • Has a red signal in Shepard’s and a yellow signal in KeyCite. • Points of law in this case were superseded by statute (18 USCS § 3501) as stated in United States v. Dickerson, 166 F.3d 667 (4th Cir. 1999) and United States v. Rivas-Lopez, 988 F. Supp. 1424 (D. Utah 1997). • This statute was later found unconstitutional on the same points of law, so the negative treatment was negated by its own negative treatment (or the two negatives cancelled one another out). The following images are mock-ups of a form for users to submit content (Image 1) and how that content displays in the citator report (Image 2): • After the user submits the proposed content, the data routes to an editor for review and approval. • Editor-approved UGC appends to the end of the citator report and can be expanded or minimized by individual users (by clicking on the plus or minus sign next to Explanations). • The editor can add comment during the approval process that displays with the UGC. Image 2: Editor-approved report with UGC showing LIMITATIONS & ISSUES There are many issues related to incorporating UGC into online citators, including: • Limited base - UGC can only be added by users, so the user pool is inherently limited based on subscribership. • Copyright - This is a major issue related to UGC. Users relinquish the rights to their content in this scenario, but that could change as this area of law develops more fully in the future. • Payment – There could be cost concessions to encourage user participation or to reward high value contributors and keep them as users, but the essence of UGC is that there is no formal payment system in exchange for the content. The value to users is that the tool becomes easier to use and more reliable over time as reports are enhanced with UGC. • Credit/Anonymity – This solution includes a screen name for the user adding the content, but there could be an option to submit anonymously. This could encourage participation from users who do not want to or who cannot be associated with internet posts for confidentiality reasons or to comply with the requirements of their employer. A ranking system for contributors could also help encourage non-anonymous participation with recognition as the reward. • Liability for incorrect information : I propose that editors must approve submissions, but even something vetted by an editor can be incorrect or incomplete. I envision every comment being qualified with a disclaimer similar to the Administrator comment in Image 2 that says the final legal analysis and application of the law to the facts is up to the end user. This poster is based on a paper in progress. If you are interested in following the paper or would like to contact me, please use one of the following methods: • Scan the QR code or go to: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2280567 (this URL is also available on the back of my business card below) • Email me at [email protected] with comments, questions, or suggestions. 0 5 A… C MORE INFORMATION/FOLLOW Image 1: Form to submit UGC PROPOSED SOLUTION • A citator should be able to represent that the negative treatment in the 1999 Dickerson was cancelled out when the statute was found unconstitutional on the same points of law (as stated in a later case). • There is currently no way to assign signals to points of law (although the Lexis Advance Legal Issue Trail is a step in the right direction). User generated content can fill this gap as demonstrated in the images below. CONCLUSION The addition of user-generated content is the next logical step in the evolution of citators because it adds a level of sophistication to the reports that would be difficult to achieve by other means absent increased staffing and significant financial investment from vendors. The greatest incentive for vendors is that early adoption could give one vendor a competitive advantage over the others.
-
Upload
rachel-gordon -
Category
Law
-
view
38 -
download
0
description
This poster was presented at the 2013 American Association of Law Libraries conference. It proposes adding user-generated content to legal citator reports to explain nuances and eliminate duplication of efforts.
Transcript of Enhancing citator reports with user generated content
Printing:This poster is 48” wide by 36”
high. It’s designed to be printed
on a large
Customizing the
Content:The placeholders in this
are
the placeholders to add text, or
click an icon to add a table,
chart, SmartArt graphic, picture
or multimedia file.
T
from text, just click the Bullets
button on the Home tab.
If you need more placeholders
for titles,
just make a copy of what you
need and drag it into place.
PowerPoint’s Smart Guides will
help you align it with everything
else.
Want to use your own pictures
instead of ours? No problem!
Just
choose Change Picture.
Maintain the proportion of
Enhancing Citator Reports with User-Generated Content Rachel Gordon, Access Services Librarian, Mercer University, Macon, Georgia
AALL Poster #14, July 2013
BACKGROUND • Online citators are a vast improvement over their paper predecessor, but
are still so complex that a few hours of instruction in law school hardly prepares attorneys to use them correctly or to their full potential.
• I worked in customer support for LexisNexis for 9.5 years. From that experience, I know that attorneys often use citators exactly the way we tell them not to in law school. They think that a red signal means that a case is “bad law.” They do not remember the many times their legal research instructors told them to read the underlying cases, and they’re too busy to do that anyway.
• Users end up missing important cases because the warning signal is unrelated to the point of law for which they would have cited the case (absent the warning signal).
• Users tend to think in terms of cases when using citators when they should be thinking in terms of points of law.
• Users want an easy to use tool that saves them time and money. While a citator can never replace the independent judgment of an attorney, there are ways that online citators can be enhanced to make them more reliable and easier to use.
WHY USER-GENERATED CONTENT?
What is User-generated content (UGC)? • User-generated content is what it sounds like. It allows users to share
their unique insights and experiences to collaborate with others with the goal of improving a product or service. An example of UGC is a product review posted in an online forum or a store website.
Benefits of adding UGC to citator reports:
• Provides analysis to help explain intricacies of a report or the reason for a signal.
• Meets changing user expectations for interactivity and ease of use.
• Makes better use of existing resources - customer-facing editor explanations may already exist in different formats.
• Inexpensive to implement and support as the role of editors expands slightly to include reviewing and approving content submitted by users.
• Users retain their independent judgment and can decide whether to participate and whether to utilize the content submitted by others.
SAMPLE CONFUSING REPORT
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966)
• Has a red signal in Shepard’s and a yellow signal in KeyCite.
• Points of law in this case were superseded by statute (18 USCS § 3501) as stated in United States v. Dickerson, 166 F.3d 667 (4th Cir. 1999) and United States v. Rivas-Lopez, 988 F. Supp. 1424 (D. Utah 1997).
• This statute was later found unconstitutional on the same points of law, so the negative treatment was negated by its own negative treatment (or the two negatives cancelled one another out).
The following images are mock-ups of a form for users to submit content (Image 1) and how that content displays in the citator report (Image 2):
• After the user submits the proposed content, the data routes to an editor for review and approval.
• Editor-approved UGC appends to the end of the citator report and can be expanded or minimized by individual users (by clicking on the plus or minus sign next to Explanations).
• The editor can add comment during the approval process that displays with the UGC.
Image 2: Editor-approved report with UGC showing
LIMITATIONS & ISSUES There are many issues related to incorporating UGC into online citators, including:
• Limited base - UGC can only be added by users, so the user pool is inherently limited based on subscribership.
• Copyright - This is a major issue related to UGC. Users relinquish the rights to their content in this scenario, but that could change as this area of law develops more fully in the future.
• Payment – There could be cost concessions to encourage user participation or to reward high value contributors and keep them as users, but the essence of UGC is that there is no formal payment system in exchange for the content. The value to users is that the tool becomes easier to use and more reliable over time as reports are enhanced with UGC.
• Credit/Anonymity – This solution includes a screen name for the user adding the content, but there could be an option to submit anonymously. This could encourage participation from users who do not want to or who cannot be associated with internet posts for confidentiality reasons or to comply with the requirements of their employer. A ranking system for contributors could also help encourage non-anonymous participation with recognition as the reward.
• Liability for incorrect information: I propose that editors must approve submissions, but even something vetted by an editor can be incorrect or incomplete. I envision every comment being qualified with a disclaimer similar to the Administrator comment in Image 2 that says the final legal analysis and application of the law to the facts is up to the end user.
This poster is based on a paper in progress. If you are interested
in following the paper or would like to contact me, please use
one of the following methods:
• Scan the QR code or go to: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2280567 (this URL is also available on the back of my business card below)
• Email me at [email protected] with comments, questions, or suggestions.
SS0 5
A…
CMORE INFORMATION/FOLLOW
Image 1: Form to submit UGC
PROPOSED SOLUTION
• A citator should be able to represent that the negative treatment in the 1999 Dickerson was cancelled out when the statute was found unconstitutional on the same points of law (as stated in a later case).
• There is currently no way to assign signals to points of law (although the Lexis Advance Legal Issue Trail is a step in the right direction). User generated content can fill this gap as demonstrated in the images below.
CONCLUSION The addition of user-generated content is the next logical step in the
evolution of citators because it adds a level of sophistication to the
reports that would be difficult to achieve by other means absent
increased staffing and significant financial investment from vendors.
The greatest incentive for vendors is that early adoption could give one
vendor a competitive advantage over the others.
