梳理法律文本可读性度量方法，发现主流工具与领域覆盖不均。
The Use of Readability Metrics in Legal Text: A Systematic Literature Review
- 系统综述34篇论文，识别出16种可读性指标
- Flesch-Kincaid评分最常用，73.5%研究聚焦知情同意书
- 法律各领域评估工具不均衡，亟需统一标准
法律文件因结构复杂和专业术语多，理解难度大，常需专业训练，导致解读差异。语言复杂性是阅读障碍的重要原因。简化文本有助于提升大众理解力。已有多种可读性度量方法，本文采用系统综述法，分析当前用于法律与监管文本的度量工具。初筛3566篇文献，最终纳入34篇相关研究。主要目标是识别法律领域中使用的可读性指标。共发现16种不同度量方法，其中Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level使用最频繁。73.5%的研究集中在“知情同意书”领域。分析表明，法律各细分领域在可读性度量上覆盖不均，亟需建立更统一的评估标准。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Understanding the text in legal documents can be challenging due to their complex structure and the inclusion of domain-specific jargon. Laws and regulations are often crafted in such a manner that engagement with them requires formal training, potentially leading to vastly different interpretations of the same texts. Linguistic complexity is an important contributor to the difficulties experienced by readers. Simplifying texts could enhance comprehension across a broader audience, not just among trained professionals. Various metrics have been developed to measure document readability. Therefore, we adopted a systematic review approach to examine the linguistic and readability metrics currently employed for legal and regulatory texts. A total of 3566 initial papers were screened, with 34 relevant studies found and further assessed. Our primary objective was to identify which current metrics were applied for evaluating readability within the legal field. Sixteen different metrics were identified, with the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level being the most frequently used method. The majority of studies (73.5%) were found in the domain of "informed consent forms". From the analysis, it is clear that not all legal domains are well represented in terms of readability metrics and that there is a further need to develop more consensus on which metrics should be applied for legal documents.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。