Proponents Of Lawyer Dissatisfaction Discredit The Reliability Of Surveys Data

864 WordsNov 20, 20154 Pages
C. Reasons to Question Survey Data Proponents of lawyer dissatisfaction discredit the reliability of survey data in several ways. First, proponents look at the procedural and substantive defects inherent to survey testing. Second, proponents highlight related survey data—such as the high levels of lawyer depression, alcoholism, and suicide rates, to name a few—which are complimentary to the view that many lawyers are dissatisfied. Last, proponents and opponents alike, suggest that lawyers may be in denial or untruthful when responding to satisfaction surveys. Therefore, proponents of lawyer dissatisfaction argue that survey data is unreliable in measuring lawyer dissatisfaction. David Chambers, a law professor at the University of Michigan Law School, argues that procedural and substantive defects inherent to survey data make it an unreliable method for measuring lawyer dissatisfaction. First, most lawyers only place themselves above the midpoint on a satisfaction scale, which is barely more positive than negative. Second, surveys are conducted at a specific time and place, and therefore do not give a complete analysis of satisfaction. Last is the fact that many lawyers do not respond to surveys; and this is likely to be the most true among lawyers that are the least satisfied. As a result, the deference given to positive claims about lawyer satisfaction are not grounded in reliable evidence. Positive survey data on lawyer satisfaction cannot be reconciled with

    More about Proponents Of Lawyer Dissatisfaction Discredit The Reliability Of Surveys Data

      Open Document