Complexity, Simplification, and Court Approval

Last registered on November 10, 2025
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Complexity, Simplification, and Court Approval
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0017055
Initial registration date
November 07, 2025

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
November 10, 2025, 10:04 AM EST

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Primary Investigator

Name
Lena Song
Affiliation
UIUC
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Suresh Naidu
PI Affiliation
Columbia University
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Elliott Ash
PI Affiliation
ETH Zurich
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Aniket Kesari
PI Affiliation
Fordham University
Contact Investigator
PI Name
Dominik Stammbach
PI Affiliation
Princeton University
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2025-11-08
End date
2026-07-31
Keywords
Behavior, Other
Additional Keywords
JEL code(s)
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial is based on or builds upon one or more prior RCTs.
Abstract
In this project, we investigate whether judicial public reason legitimizes Supreme Court rulings for the broader public. We use recently developed natural language processing (NLP) tools to create a novel court opinion summarizer that summarizes and translates complex legal language into accessible plain English. Using survey experiments, we study 1) whether simplified summaries help laypeople better understand expert judicial communications 2) whether improved understanding, in turn, increase public support for the Supreme Court and its decisions.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Ash, Elliott et al. 2025. "Complexity, Simplification, and Court Approval." AEA RCT Registry. November 10. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.17055-1.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
We conduct two survey experiments to study how summarization and simplification influence understanding of legal reasoning and approval of Supreme Court decisions. The interventions randomize participants' access to two types of summaries: legalese and plain language summaries.
Intervention Start Date
2025-11-08
Intervention End Date
2026-07-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
In Experiment 1, the main outcome is performance on the bar exam questions.
In Experiment 2, the main outcomes are attitudes toward the decision and perceived legitimacy of the Supreme Court.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
In Experiment 1, each respondent answers four bar exam questions. For each respondent, the four questions are randomly drawn from the set of cases and randomly assigned to one of four summary conditions with equal probability: no summary, legalese summary, plain summary, or choice of summary (where participant can choose which summary, if any, to read before answering the question).

In Experiment 2, respondents will be randomly assigned to view control text, or a legalese or a plain summary of the majority opinion on a case.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Participants are randomized into exposure to text within the survey.
Randomization Unit
The unit of randomization is at the bar exam question level for Experiment 1, and the individual level for Experiment 2.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
1500 participants for Experiment 1, and 6,000-10,000 participants in Experiment 2 (depending on the number of cases selected)
Sample size: planned number of observations
1500 participants for Experiment 1, and 6,000-10,000 participants in Experiment 2 (depending on the number of cases selected)
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
Experiment 1 involves a within-subject design. For Experiment 2, we'll have 2,000-2,300 participants per arm.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Columbia University
IRB Approval Date
2025-06-06
IRB Approval Number
IRB-AAAU3574
Analysis Plan

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information