In 2003, Animators at Law initiated a study to compare the learning and communication styles of practicing attorneys and of the general public.1 The specific objectives of the study were to:
• Identify the dominant learning and communication styles of practicing attorneys;
• Confirm the dominant learning and communication styles of the general public; and
• Determine whether there is a significant difference in the way attorneys and the general public prefer to learn and communicate.
The data collection vehicle used for this study was a thirty question online survey (Appendix A). The survey was designed to assess an individual's preferred style of learning whether visual (seeing), auditory (hearing) or kinesthetic (feeling). Stephanie Shipper 2 of Expert Outcomes, assisted by Dr. Thomas L. Layton 3 of the ELFoundation, developed the survey. Both Ms. Shipper and Dr. Layton are recognized experts in the learning and communication fields.
Animators at Law hosted and administered the survey and collected data for three years beginning in September 2003. Various promotional efforts including press releases and an e-mail campaign encouraged respondents to take the survey. All told, 2,044 individuals took the survey. A total of 387 of those participants were practicing attorneys and 1,657 were not.
The thirty question survey (Appendix A) is divided into three sections of ten questions each. Each section of ten questions assesses the degree to which the participant prefers one of the three learning styles (visual, auditory or kinesthetic). The survey does not reveal to the participant which of the three styles is being assessed. A score of six out of ten answers marked "yes" in a section is considered significant and an indicator of a preference for that learning style.
For purposes of this study, results from individual survey takers were not included when:
• The participant did not complete all thirty questions;
• None of the three section scores was six or higher; or
• Two or three (of three) total section scores were six or higher.
Using these screening techniques, the total sample size of the study was reduced by 532 persons to 1,512. A total of 262 were practicing attorneys and 1,250 were members of the general public.
The key findings of this study are:
• Practicing
attorneys and the general public communicate in significantly different
ways. The majority of the general public are visual learners,
and the majority of practicing attorneys are not. Attorneys are 10%
more likely to be auditory learners, 4% more likely to be kinesthetic
learners and 14% less likely to be visual learners than the
general public.
• The general public prefers learning visually by a significant majority. Fully 61% of the general public learns visually. This result is consistent with other VAK and VARK studies of the general population.
• Practicing attorneys, unlike the majority of the population, are not majority visual learners and communicators. Practicing attorneys show a greater preference for auditory learning and kinesthetic learning.
• Attorneys and juries communicate and learn differently.
Assuming that juries are a fair representation of the general public, one can reasonably conclude that juries and the attorneys who endeavor to communicate as effectively and efficiently as possible with them, may, in fact, not be doing so.4
Educational experts largely agree that people prefer learning new information in one of three primary ways: seeing, hearing or experiencing.5 Educational scientists call these three groups: visual learners, auditory learners and kinesthetic learners.
Auditory learners receive information best when they hear it. They prefer lectures, reading, word-play and talking at length.
Kinesthetic learners learn best when they "experience" new information, often in the form of handling a device, learning a new hands-on skill or fully immersing themselves in a workshop-style learning environment.
Visual learners, the vast majority of the population, learn best by watching. They enjoy television,utilize charts and often use whiteboards in a corporate setting.
Everyone utilizes all three styles of learning, yet more often than not, one style is dominant. That is, there is typically one way that an individual learns most effectively. Furthermore, it is accepted that a persons's preferred means of communicating is almost always the same as one's preferred means of learning.
Repeated studies have found that the general population is approximately 65% visual, 20% auditory and 15% kinesthetic. This research is changing education models around the world and inspiring once long-winded instructors to incorporate visual and tactile aids into teaching methods.6
It is this trend that inspired this study. We asked, simply, if the educational system is moving towards a more visual and kinesthetic model of teaching, why do attorneys who communicate with juries do so primarily by speaking to them? The question of whether this verbal approach results from how an attorney is born or trained is beyond the scope of this study. Instead, we have sought simply to identify whether there is a significant difference between the preferred learning styles of attorneys and the general public. We believe that this is the first study that has investigated this question.
The survey results are shown below:
The differences in learning and communication styles between practicing attorneys and the general public are surprising. On average, a non attorney is most likely to be a visual learner, and a practicing attorney is most likely to be a non-visual learner (i.e. auditory or kinesthetic). The non attorney statistics are consistent with similar studies. Such studies draw the same conclusion that regardless of age, gender or other demographics, a majority of the population learns best visually.
Additional survey results are shown below:
Practicing attorneys are 10% more likely to be auditory learners and 4% more likely to be kinesthetic learners than the general public. Practicing attorneys are 14% less likely to be visual learners and communicators.
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE COURTROOM
Given these findings, litigator to juror communication should be reevaluated. Since the general public is mainly visual, it follows that a jury - presumably representative of the general public - also would be mainly visual. Yet, the survey results reveal clearly that a majority of practicing attorneys are not visual. Since people will almost always communicate in the same style as they prefer for learning, and since the courtroom has long been dominated by oratory, we believe that a significant communication gap exists between practicing attorneys and jurors.
Based on the results of the study, a typical twelve-person jury would likely be composed of seven "visual" jurors, three "feeling" jurors and only two "hearing" jurors. Accordingly, it is likely that a visual-majority jury is going to be listening to a non-visual attorney speak in a typical courtroom. Said another way, if a litigator is not communicating by using visual and kinesthetic tools while speaking, they are under-communicating with 82% of the jury.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Attorneys should be aware of their tendency to communicate non-visually, and should consider adapting to their audience. The educational community has made this shift over the last three decades, and, similarly, attorneys involved in communicating with the general public should consider doing the same.
Here are three practical tips to aid in achieving maximum clarity in persuasive communications with jurors:
1) Address All Three Learning Styles
Read a few pages in a best-selling novel, and it will not be uncommon to read about "the sounds of the forest, the feel of the damp heavy air and a color so green that it reminded him of what he had only seen before in the hills of Ireland." The preceding example, of course, points out the use of language typically associated with the three learning/communication styles. Best-selling authors and editors intentionally add such language to speak to the widest audience possible, and the courtroom environment should be no different. Use a combination of phrases like "I hope you can see where this leaves us?" "I hope you are hearing this message" and "Can you imagine what that might feel like?" Examples of such language are readily available on the internet.7
2) Use Visual and Kinesthetic Evidence
While it may be tempting just to speak to a jury, the survey data suggests doing otherwise. Indeed, the survey data strongly indicates that merely speaking information to a jury will result in under-communication with 82% of the audience. Ideally, a more balanced approach includes visual information. Visual information can take any form, whether a document, an electronic presentation, a chart, a whiteboard or blackboard. Adding kinesthetic evidence, perhaps in the form of a scale model, will further communicate the point. For most attorneys, using such a blended approach will seem unnatural and unnecessary, but this is precisely the point of this study. Ultimately,we all want to be understood. Accordingly, we must adapt to our audience to accomplish this goal.
3) If it is a Critical Point, Use Visual Evidence to Emphasize the Point
One study has found that juror memory retention is increased 650% when oral communications are combined with visual communications. In its wake, many litigators have embraced the use of visual evidence and technology over the last thirty years. Today's modern litigator recognizes the value of combining oral and visual evidence. They include creative exhibits in their presentation that "show" the jury key legal arguments, not just key documents. Always remember, a majority of the jury needs to see the information to understand and retain it. If the jury must remember the point, then show them and tell them. They need to see the conclusion as well as the documentsfrom which they must draw a conclusion.
To better communicate with and to be understood
by people who speak a different language from our native tongue, we
know that we must learn their language and some of their culture. Speaking
our native language louder, slower or with the perfect choice of words
will not make us understood. We must adapt and be willing to learn a
new anguage and new method of communication. For most attorneys, the
new language they must learn is the visual language.
1. For purposes of this study, Animators
at Law compared practicing attorneys and the general public. We use
the terms "general public" and "non-attorneys" interchangeably
throughout this study to describe anyone who is not actively engaged
in the practice of law, even if they have a law degree.
2. Stephanie Shipper is President of Expert Outcomes.
She is an expert trainer and coach with twenty-five years of experience
training executives and senior account managers to develop long-lasting
customer relationships, build customer trust and brand loyalty and diplomatically
negotiate and effectively resolve conflicts by applying Neuro-Linguistic
Programming (NLP). NLP is required cross-cultural communications training
for all UN diplomats, and 70% of Fortune 500 executives. Stephanie received
her bachelor's degree inpsychology from Goddard College in Plainfield,
VT. She is a Certified Trainer of NLP who has trained with eight leading
experts, nationally and internationally, for 2000 hours, over a period
of eight years. As a Certified Master Practitioner and Modeler of NLP,
Stephanie was mentored by Dr. Wyatt Woodsmall in Peak Performance modeling.
Dr. Woodsmall modeled expert strategies with the U.S. Olympic Diving
Team and the U.S. Army. She has also had 200 clinical hours of training
and supervision in Gestalt Therapy.
3. Thomas L. Layton, Ph.D., CCC-SLP, ASHA Fellow,
has more than thirty years as a professor, clinician, and teacher. He
is responsible as chair and head of the ELFoundation, acting as a primary
resource for research, publications, grant solicitation, training, workshops,
and therapists. He is the author and editor of three textbooks, two
tests, and more than 40 articles on children with communication disorders.
He has also presented locally, nationally, and internationally on more
than 150 different topics on communication and learning in low achieving
children. Dr. Layton has been awarded the "Clinical Achievement
Award" by the North Carolina Speech-Hearing-Language Association,
a Fellow of the American Speech-Language Hearing Association, and Special
Recognition Honor of the Triangle Down Syndrome Network. He has served
on many boards and professional organizations, such as, President of
the North Carolina Speech-Hearing-Language Association, School Board
member of School in the Community Charter School, Co-chair Advisory
Board for ParentSupport Network of North Carolina, Advisory Board Member
for Parent Network of Orange, Durham and Chatham Counties, Member of
Durham Public Schools' Steering Committee for Continuous Improvement
Monitoring, consultant to the Ministry of Education in the Bahamas,
consultant to the Medical University of South Carolina and Project Potential
at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill.
4. Only one demographic factor is used in this
study: whether a person practices law or not. In analyzing the data
produced by the general public for purposes of drawing conclusions about
a jury, it is noteworthy that a practicing attorney could possibly sit
on a jury. This study does not attempt to correct for that possibility.
Roughly, one in 300 persons in the country is an attorney, but not all
of those attorneys practice law and many states still prohibit attorneys
from serving on a jury. Accordingly, we do not believe the results of
this study would be impacted in a statistically significant way by the
possibility of apracticing attorney serving on a jury.
5. Maryann Kiely, Meta-Analysis of Experimental
Research Based on the Dunn and Dunn Model, Journal Of Educational Research
(2005). See generally Dunn, R., Dunn, K., & Price, G. E., Learning
Style Inventory, (Price Systems 1984).
6. Bill Bradford, Reaching the Visual Learner:
Teaching Property Through Art, The Law Teacher (2004). See Jessica Sobanski,
See How Math Makes Sense (LearningExpress 2002); Donovan R. Walling,
Teaching Writing to Visual,Auditory, and Kinesthetic Learners (Corwin
Press 2006); Cheri Fuller, Talkers, Watchers and Doers: Unlocking Your
Child's Unique Learning Style (Pinon Press 2004).
7. http://www.studentbmj.com/issues/03/05/life/163.php
8. Harold Weiss & J.B. McGrath, Jr.,
Technically Speaking: Oral Communication for Engineers, Scientists and
TechnicalPersonnel (1963).
Appendices
