Abstract
The proceedings of the 1983 Summer Conference on Communication Strategies in the Practice of Lawyering (Matlon and Crawford, 1983) outlined five areas in which the interests of communication researchers and practicing attorneys intersect: Legal Interviewing and Counseling, Legal Negotiating and Bargaining, Jury Selection and Jury Behavior, Direct and Cross Examination, and Opening Statements and Closing Arguments. Three of the five categories concern the behavior of lawyers during trials. Most of the published research on communication and the law reflects this emphasis. Specifically, analysis of the actions of judges (Wright, 1984; Goss, 1974; Makau, 1984), lawyers (Dickens & Schwartz, 1971; Abbott, 1974; Dicks, 1981; Beach, 1985) and juries (Bennett, 1978; 1979; Buchanan et al., 1978; Miller et al., 1983; Bennett & Feldman, 1985) comprise the lion’s share of Communication and Law research. These studies each provide important insight concerning the ways in which communication affects the practice of lawyering. However, they distort our understanding of the role of symbols in the legal process and unnecessarily restrict the scope of research in this area.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Abbott, D., 1974, “The Jurisprudential Analogy: Argumentation and the New Rhetoric,” Central States Speech Journal, 25, 50–55.
Anapol, M., 1970, “Rhetoric and Law: An Overview,” Today’s Speech, 18, 12–20.
Beach, W., 1985, “Temporal Density in Courtroom Interaction: Constraints on the Recovery of Past Events in Legal Discourse,” Communication Monographs, 52, 1–18.
Bennett, W.L., 1978, “Storytelling in Criminal Trials: A Model of Social Judgment,” The Quarterly Journal of Speech, 64, 1–22.
Bennett, W.L., 1979, “Rhetorical Transformation of Evidence in Criminal Trials: Creating Grounds for Legal Judgment,” The Quarterly Journal of Speech, 65, 311–323.
Bennett, W.L., & Feldman, M.S., 1981, Reconstructing Reality in the Courtroom, New Brunswick, NJ.: Rutgers University Press.
Buchanan, R.W., Pryor, B., Taylor, K.P., & Strawn, D.U., 1978, “Legal Communication: An Investigation of Juror Comprehension of Pattern Instructions,” Communication Quarterly, 26, 31–35.
Burke, K., 1965/1954, Permanence and Change, Berkeley: University of California Press.
Burke, K., 1968a, Counterstatement, Berkeley: University of California Press.
Burke, K., 1968b, A Grammar of Motives, Berkeley: University of California Press.
Burke, K., 1974. A Rhetoric of Motives, Berkeley: University of California Press.
Burke, K., 1973, Philosophy of Literary Form, Berkeley: University of California Press.
Dicks, V., 1981, “Courtroom Rhetorical Strategies: Forensic and Deliberative Perspectives,” The Quarterly Journal of Speech, 67, 178–192.
Dickens, M. & Schwartz, R.E., 1971, Oral Argument Before the Supreme Court: Marshall v. Davis In The School Segregation Cases, The Quarterly Journal of Speech, 57, 32–42.
Goss, P., 1974, “Communications Research and the Rule of Law: An Opportunity for Access to Judicial Decision Making,” Today’s Speech, 22, 47–53.
Jamieson, K.M., 1973, “Natural Law as Warrant,” Philosophy & Rhetoric, 6, 235–248.
Makau, J.M., 1984, “The Supreme Court and Reasonableness,” The Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70, 379–396.
Matlon, R.J. & Crawford, R.J., Eds., 1983, Communication Strategies In The Practice Of Lawyering. Speech Communication Association, 5105 Backlick Road, #E, Annandale, Virginia 22003.
Miller, G.R., Fontes, N.E., Boster, F.J., & Sunnafrank, M.J., 1983, “Methodological Issues in Legal Communication Research: What Can Trial Simulations Tell Us?” Communication Monographs, 50, 33–46.
National Center For State Courts, 1986, State Court Caseload Statistics: Annual Report 1984, Williamsburg, Virginia.
Watzlawick, P., Weakland, J., & Fisch, R., 1974, Change, New York: W.W. Norton.
Wright, W.E., 1964, “Judicial Rhetoric: A Field for Research,” Communication Monographs, 31, 71–76.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1987 Plenum Press, New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Evangelista, P. (1987). Communication Research and the Practice of Lawyering: Is the Tail Wagging the Dog?. In: Kevelson, R. (eds) Law and Semiotics. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-0959-8_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-0959-8_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4612-8265-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-4613-0959-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive