Miscellaneous

Does Bad Googling Make Bad Law?

By Anne Skove, Esq.

A new study from the University of Chicago weighs the effects of no-brainer research (i.e., Googling) on science. The author found that too much Googling leads to less citation of other articles. He also found that the little research cited tends to be extremely recent.

Ah, the mark of Google!

What does this mean for the law? The U of C study found that legal research appears to be less at-risk. Perhaps this is because legal researchers are a) wonkier, and b) use different research tools than the rest of the known universe (would you Shepardize using Google? Don't answer that.)

But bad science can make bad law. Think of the research cited by opinions and advocates -- DNA, autism, polygraphs, mental health, substance abuse, pharmacology, neuroscience, nanotechnology. These studies don't drive the law, but they are important pieces of the puzzle.

Moreover, shoddy research habits frustrate us in other ways. See, e.g., Mistakes Were Made, court-o-rama (July 4, 2008). Keep your clerks in check, judges.

Sooo...all you summer interns out there (yes, you!), puh-leeeeze open a book! Pull it from the shelf, crack its spine, smell the old-book smell, turn the pages, and learn something! Believe it or not, book-reading can sometimes get you better information than the ever-lovin' Googling method. (Cue Tom with his techie comment...but know that he never dealt with interns.)

See Electronic Publications: Too Much of A Good Thing? University of Chicago press release (July 28, 2008). And no, we did not find that via Google.

Full post as published by court-o-rama.org on July 29, 2008 (boomark / email).