On January 26, Sandra Pérez successfully defended her PhD thesis — a milestone that is both academically outstanding and professionally meaningful for Plus Ethics.
Her work, awarded Highest Honors (Cum Laude) and granted an Industrial Mention, is the result of close collaboration between academia and industry, illustrating the value of knowledge transfer when it is grounded in rigor, purpose, and social responsibility.
What is the thesis about?
The dissertation, titled “The Human Factor and the 4.0 Digital Transformation of the Criminal Justice System: Social Acceptance and Professional Impact” addresses a defining question of our time: how digitalization and artificial intelligence are reshaping criminal justice systems, and what role humans should play in that transformation.
Rather than focusing exclusively on the technical dimension, the thesis highlights an aspect often overlooked in public debate: the perceptions, attitudes, and levels of trust of both citizens and legal professionals toward the use of algorithms and AI systems in judicial, policing, and penitentiary decision-making.
The research combines theoretical analysis with qualitative and quantitative empirical studies, and includes a strong applied component that culminates in the development of a practical tool to assess social acceptance of AI technologies within public administrations. This transfer-to-practice dimension is precisely what motivated the Industrial Mention and aligns directly with Plus Ethics’ mission: turning ethical reflection into operational tools and responsible decision-making frameworks.
Why is this research relevant?
The significance of this thesis can be understood across three complementary levels:
1. Social relevance
At a time when the automation of public decisions raises legitimate concerns, this research provides empirical evidence on how these technologies are perceived and which conditions are necessary to build trust. The findings show that acceptance of AI does not depend solely on technical efficiency, but also on factors such as transparency, proportionality of decisions, and the presence of meaningful human oversight.
2. Professional and institutional relevance
For legal practitioners, public administrations, and technology policy makers, the thesis offers both an analytical framework and practical instruments to evaluate risks, resistance, and opportunities. The key question is not only whether a technology can be implemented, but how it can be introduced in a way that is legitimate, understandable, and aligned with fundamental rights.
3. Ethical and regulatory relevance
The work sits at the intersection of technological innovation and democratic governance. It argues that the digitalization of justice should not be conceived as a replacement of human judgment, but rather as a human-machine collaboration model, where ultimate responsibility and the capacity for review remain firmly in human hands. This perspective is consistent with emerging European regulatory frameworks and reinforces the need to embed ethics at the design stage, rather than treating it as a corrective afterthought.
A model of impactful university–industry collaboration
The thesis was co-supervised by Dr. Fernando Miró Llinares and Dr. Francisco J. Castro-Toledo, founders of Plus Ethics, reinforcing a central idea: academic research can and should engage with the professional world to generate applicable solutions. The Industrial Mention is not merely a formal distinction; it signals that the knowledge produced goes beyond theory and translates into tools that can serve institutions and society at large.
Looking ahead
The digital transformation of justice systems, security structures, and public administrations will continue to accelerate. The real question is not whether algorithms and artificial intelligence will be adopted, but under which principles, with which safeguards, and with what level of human and societal participation. Research such as Sandra Pérez’s helps move the debate beyond uncritical enthusiasm or automatic rejection toward a more constructive ground: informed evaluation, applied ethics, and responsible technology governance.