Conversational vs Traditional: Comparing Search Behavior and Outcome in Legal Case Retrieval

In recent years, legal case retrieval has attracted much attention in the IR research community. It aims to retrieve supporting cases for a given query case and contributes to better legal systems. While using a legal case retrieval system, users always feel difficult to construct accurate queries to express their information need, especially when they lack sufficient domain knowledge. Since conversational search has been widely recognized to fulfill users' complex and exploratory information need, we investigate whether conversational search paradigm can be adopted to improve users' legal case retrieval experience. We design a laboratory-based study to collect users' interaction behaviors and explicit feedback signals while using traditional and agent-mediated conversational legal case retrieval systems. Based on the collected data, we compare search behavior and outcome of these two different kinds of interaction paradigms. Compared with the traditional one, experimental results show that users can achieve better retrieval performance with the conversational case retrieval system. Moreover, conversational system can also save users' efforts in formulating queries and examining results.