Abstract
Everyday legal discourse refers to the spoken language with which ordinary people constitute the law-in-action. In this article, we experimentally investigate the social distribution of rule-and relationally-oriented discourse found by ethnographers in small-claims court settings. We examine the influences of sex differences and social ties between disputants on these types of discourse in a mock small-claims setting using a quantitative content coding scheme. We do not find empirical support for sex differences in the production of simulated everyday legal discourse. The relational context of a dispute (operationalized as the strength of social ties between disputants) has significant effects on the distribution of rule-and relationally-oriented discourse, so that disputants in relationally-close contexts produce more relationally-oriented discourse and those in relationally-distant contexts produce more rule-oriented discourses than those in relationally-close contexts. With these findings as a backdrop, we discuss (1) the contextual nature of sex differences in everyday legal discourse; (2) discourse "switching" and emotional investment in personal relationships, and (3) applications for our coding scheme to studies of disputing frames.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 639-665 |
| Number of pages | 27 |
| Journal | Law and Society Review |
| Volume | 32 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| State | Published - 1998 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Law
- Sociology and Political Science
Cite this
Voice and context in simulated everyday legal discourse : The influence of sex differences and social ties. / Morrill, Calvin; Johnson, Michelle; Harrison, Tyler R.
In: Law and Society Review, Vol. 32, No. 3, 1998, p. 639-665.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Voice and context in simulated everyday legal discourse
T2 - The influence of sex differences and social ties
AU - Morrill, Calvin
AU - Johnson, Michelle
AU - Harrison, Tyler R
PY - 1998
Y1 - 1998
N2 - Everyday legal discourse refers to the spoken language with which ordinary people constitute the law-in-action. In this article, we experimentally investigate the social distribution of rule-and relationally-oriented discourse found by ethnographers in small-claims court settings. We examine the influences of sex differences and social ties between disputants on these types of discourse in a mock small-claims setting using a quantitative content coding scheme. We do not find empirical support for sex differences in the production of simulated everyday legal discourse. The relational context of a dispute (operationalized as the strength of social ties between disputants) has significant effects on the distribution of rule-and relationally-oriented discourse, so that disputants in relationally-close contexts produce more relationally-oriented discourse and those in relationally-distant contexts produce more rule-oriented discourses than those in relationally-close contexts. With these findings as a backdrop, we discuss (1) the contextual nature of sex differences in everyday legal discourse; (2) discourse "switching" and emotional investment in personal relationships, and (3) applications for our coding scheme to studies of disputing frames.
AB - Everyday legal discourse refers to the spoken language with which ordinary people constitute the law-in-action. In this article, we experimentally investigate the social distribution of rule-and relationally-oriented discourse found by ethnographers in small-claims court settings. We examine the influences of sex differences and social ties between disputants on these types of discourse in a mock small-claims setting using a quantitative content coding scheme. We do not find empirical support for sex differences in the production of simulated everyday legal discourse. The relational context of a dispute (operationalized as the strength of social ties between disputants) has significant effects on the distribution of rule-and relationally-oriented discourse, so that disputants in relationally-close contexts produce more relationally-oriented discourse and those in relationally-distant contexts produce more rule-oriented discourses than those in relationally-close contexts. With these findings as a backdrop, we discuss (1) the contextual nature of sex differences in everyday legal discourse; (2) discourse "switching" and emotional investment in personal relationships, and (3) applications for our coding scheme to studies of disputing frames.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032260955&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032260955&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:0032260955
VL - 32
SP - 639
EP - 665
JO - Law and Society Review
JF - Law and Society Review
SN - 0023-9216
IS - 3
ER -