An empirical analysis of the perceived effectiveness and credibility of women trial lawyers
AuthorMontgomery, Carrie, 1960-
College students -- Arizona -- Attitudes.
Women lawyers -- Public opinion.
MetadataShow full item record
PublisherThe University of Arizona.
RightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.
AbstractA group of 188 undergraduate students at the University of Arizona read three vignettes depicting a lawyer's performance at trial. The types of cases presented at trial were rape, sex discrimination, family law (divorce and child support), murder, narcotics, contracts, paternity, prostitution, and insanity. Some of the subjects read a case presented by lawyer John McKay, while others read the same case presented by lawyer Joan McKay. A multivariate analysis of variance revealed no significant differences in the perceived effectiveness and credibility of the trial lawyers, with male and female attorneys rated equally competent. The results were most encouraging for women entering the profession of law, and showed that bright undergraduate college freshmen now perceive women attorneys without sexism and with credibility.
Degree ProgramGraduate College