Even Lawyers want to understand: Plain language increases lawyers’ credibility to both lawyers...

Even Lawyers want to understand Plain language increases lawyers’ credibility

to both lawyers and laypeople

Kath Straub – Usability.org Julie Clement– J Clement Communications

Annetta Cheek – Center for Plain Language Sean Mahaffey- U Cincinnati College of Law

IC Clear | Clarity2014 ‘Learning to be clear’

However guilty defendants, upon due inquiry, might prove to have been, they were, until convicted, presumed to be innocent.

Powell v Alabama 287 U.S. 45 (1932).

However guilty defendants, upon due inquiry, might prove to have been, they were, until convicted, presumed to be innocent.

Powell v Alabama 287 U.S. 45 (1932).

Let us help ….

However guilty defendants might prove to have been at trial, they were presumed to be innocent until convicted.

This study We set out to replicate Benson & Kessler to reality check our data collection method. Along the way, we noticed some interesting findings.

We collected data from 38 lawyers (unpaid volunteers)

93 laypeople (Paid MTURKers)

50%

Lawyers (n=38)

Participant Demographics

Non-Lawyers (n=91)

Gender   Female   Male  Female   Male  

Age  

Educa1on  

Na1ve    Language  

18-­‐  24   25-­‐34   35-­‐54   55+  

50%

25  –  34   55+  

HS   Some  college   BA/BS  Graduate  Degree  

Graduate  Degree  

English  English  

Lithuanian  German  

Our stimulus were items similar to B&K. The plain language versions were cleaned up a bit.

Thanks  to    Joe  Kimble.  

In  the  findings,  note      

•  Differences  between  legalese  and  plain  •  Similari1es  between  lawyers  and  laypeople  

•  Whether  people  agree  or  disagree  with  the  statement  

Do Plain Language lawyers communicate effectively?

Is the writer easy to understand?

Lawyers   Non-lawyers  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

Agree  

Neutral  Disagree  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

Significant difference  Significant difference  

Disagree    for  legalese.  

How well will clients understand this lawyer?

Lawyers   Non-lawyers  

Very Easy  

Easy  Hard  Very Hard  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

Marginally different (p<.09)  Significantly different  

How well will juries understand this lawyer?

Lawyers   Non-lawyers  

Very Easy  

Easy  Hard  Very Hard  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

Significantly different  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

Significantly different  

How well will other lawyers understand this lawyer?

Lawyers   Non-lawyers  

Very Easy  

Easy  Hard  Very Hard  

0% 50% 100%

Legal  

Plain  

Significantly different  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

Lawyers  agree  that  legalese  is  hard    to  understand.  

Significantly different  

Takeaways Lawyers are just plain hard to understand. Even for other lawyers. Plain language helps.

Is Plain Language sufficiently specific?

Are the passages specific and concise?

Lawyers   Non-lawyers  

Agree  

Neutral  Disagree  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

Significant difference  Significant difference  

Surprise?    Disagree  for  legalese.  

Is the writer convincing?

Lawyers   Non-lawyers  

Agree  

Neutral  Disagree  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

Significant difference   No difference  

Takeaways Lawyers agree that plain language is clearer, more specific, and more persuasive than legalese. Non-lawyers have some doubts.

Is the writer a successful lawyer?

Did the writer go to a prestigious law school?

Lawyers   Non-lawyers  

Agree  

Neutral  Disagree  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

Significant difference   No difference  

Surprise?    Disagree  for  legalese.  

Was the writer in the top of their class?

Lawyers   Non-lawyers  

Agree  

Neutral  Disagree  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

Significant difference   No difference  

Surprise?    Disagree  for  legalese.  

What level has the writer reached in the firm?

Lawyers   Non-lawyers  

Managing Partner  

Partner  Associate  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

Staff Attorney  Paralegal  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

Significant difference   No difference  

Plain  language  lawyers  do  not  make    Managing  Partner  

Takeaways People expect prestigious schools to teach both languages: Plain and legalese Plain language helps with cases and clients, but to run the firm, you need legalese

Should your lawyer speak plain language?

Would you be satisfied with this lawyer as counsel?

Lawyers   Non-lawyers  

Satisfied  

Neutral  Dissatisfied  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

Marginally different (p<.09)  Significant difference  

Is the writer trustworthy?

Lawyers   Non-lawyers  

Agree  

Neutral  Disagree  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

Not different  Significant difference  

Surprise!  

Does the writer win cases?

Lawyers   Non-lawyers  

Agree  

Neutral  Disagree  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

0%   50%   100%  

Legal  

Plain  

No difference  Marginally different: p<.06  

Again,  non-­‐lawyers  are  not  sure  that  plain  language  helps.  

Takeaway Even lawyers prefer to work with lawyers who use plain language!

•  Even lawyers have trouble understanding lawyers. Plain language helps.

•  Lawyers agree that plain language is clearer, more specific, and more persuasive.

•  Law schools still need to teach lawyers to understand two languages: plain and legalese.

•  People--even lawyers--want their lawyers to use plain language.

Our conclusions …

Questions?

Kath Straub Usability.org Center for Plain Language kath@usability.org

If you have more questions, email…