Credible, Not Always Correct: How Reddit Users Verify AI-Generated Legal Advice

Research from arXiv highlights that laypeople utilizing Large Language Models (LLMs) for legal advice primarily assess credibility rather than absolute accuracy. This assessment is driven by various social verification practices observed on platforms like Reddit, where users evaluate AI-generated legal guidance. The practical application of such advice is dependent on its social production of credibility, not necessarily its factual correctness.

Why it matters

This research reveals a critical gap between the technical accuracy of AI outputs and their practical adoption by users, particularly in sensitive domains like legal advice. Understanding how credibility is established in a social context for AI-generated information is vital for the design, deployment, and regulation of future AI systems across various sectors, impacting user trust and potential liability.

Key insights

• Laypeople are increasingly using LLMs for real legal problems, particularly amidst access-to-justice deficits.
• The effectiveness of AI-generated legal advice for users hinges on its perceived credibility rather than its objective accuracy.
• Verification practices for AI legal advice are diverse, ranging from triangulating information across multiple LLMs to evaluating advice based on source characteristics or peer reactions.
• The study analyzed 153 Reddit narratives and 5,341 community reactions to map these verification practices.
• A minority of users verify AI advice by cross-referencing different models, indicating a nascent understanding of model limitations.

Source

arXiv — Computers and Society — https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.13369