PRESIDENT'S PAGE
Law, Communication, and Psychological Type Theory
M
y father taught me
to question assump-
tions, to be sure that
the belief you hold is
your own. A commonly held belief
— or at least a statement — is that
legal education doesn't teach how to
practice law.'
I've always disagreed with this
claim, and I suspect that would be so
even if I hadn't had such a superior
legal education. I am grateful for the
education I received and think about
that a lot. Perhaps one of the reasons
why is that, hy happenstance, my
law school education included Don
and Marty Peters, Don as my civil
procedure professor and Marty as
a psychologist at the University of
Florida College of Law.
Don and Marty believed that if we
knew and understood our psycho-
logical types — the way we process
information, make decisions, and in-
teract with others — then we would
he better students; we would engage
more actively in the learning process,
and thus maximize our efforts.
As incoming law students in Janu-
ary 1985, Marty administered to us
tbe Myers-Briggs Type Indicator®
test. The test identifies 16 psycho-
logical tjrpes, but makes no judgment
ahout intelligence, maturity, skill
levels, mental health, behavior, or
other values. Instead, the test mea-
sures between four different prefer-
ences: extraversion vs. introversion,
sensing vs. intuition, thinking vs.
feeling, and judging vs. perceiving.
By understanding where your
natural preferences are, you learn
two things: One is bow and why you
make decisions and process informa-
tion and —just as important — gain
an understanding of how and why
other psychological types process
and apply information.
4 THE FLORIDA BAR JOURNAL/JANUARY 2011
by Mayanne Downs
So what's the point of all of this?
Well, for me it led to a greater un-
derstanding of how I made decisions,
how I could best study, and how I
could modify my natural behavior to
he a better student. But even more
important than that was the knowl-
edge I gained about other people, and
how their thought and decision-mak-
ing processes worked.
Marty and Don were keenly at-
tuned to these intangibles and
passed on their insights to us.
One of the lessons Don taught my
civil procedure class was the value
of validation. He gave us examples
from his work in clinical practices
and explained that the lawyers who
verbally acknowledged what their
clients were saying (and feeling)
made the clients more comfortable,
obtained better information, and this
led in turn to the clients believing
that the lawyers cared about the
outcome of their cases. It was simple,
he said. Just acknowledge what the
client is saying, and how difficult
tbe circumstances are. I've used that
technique for years, and it works.
My law school class was abuzz with
psychological-types discussions and
assessments. We regularly guessed
the types of others and introduced
ourselves at parties by type. ("Hi, I'm
Pat, and I'm an ENFP!") We puzzled
over those with what seemed to us
to be typing at odds with their per-
ceived personalities. Marty helped us
understand, for example, that extro-
verts do best talking through legal
issues, and that study groups would
help them. Introverts, on the other
hand, who prefer to seek stimulation
internally, might do better working
alone. I know that my exposure to
Don and Marty Peters made me a
better lawyer and person.
I saw Don recently at a mediation
seminar in Orlando. He spoke about
a variety of psychological and com-
munications issues, and how they
relate to mediation. I was fascinated,
transported back to January 1985,
remembering how Professor Pe-
ters always challenged us to think
broadly, to challenge assumptions,
and consider more than the simple
rules of civil procedure at hand. He
talked about the partisan approach
humans have to communication and
information, how we seek out infor-
mation that confirms our beliefs and
ignore information that varies from
what we think is right. He showed us
drawings and cartoons that vividly
illustrated this point, some quite
striking.
He also explained some other
interesting biases. One is that we
humans tend to over-rate our influ-
ence and effect on events. Sound
familiar? How often do we as lawyers
give ourselves too much credit for the
outcome? The lessons were central
for lawyers; being able to detect and
PRESIDENT'S PAGE continued on page 6
 PRESIDENT'S PAGE continued from page 4

correct bias in our assessment, in- good counselor, as well as an advo-

PRESIDENT
ayanne Dov^ns
PRESIDENT-ELECT
Scott G. Hawkins
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
John F. Harkness, Jr.
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
FIRST CIRCUIT Stephen H, Echsner; SECOND CIR-
CUIT Lavi/rence E. Sellers, Jr.. William i-i. Davis;
THIRD CIRCUIT Ciay A. Schnitker; FOURTH CIRCUIT
S. Grier Weils, John J. Schickei; FIFTH CIRCUIT
Denise A. D y m o n d Lyn: SIXTH CIRCUIT Andrew
B. Sasso, Murray B. Silverstein; SEVENTH CIRCUIT
Sandra C. Upchurch; EIGHTH CIRCUIT Carl B.
Schwait; NINTH CIRCUIT Mary Ann M o r g a n ,
Daniel L. DeCubeiiis, Scott R. McMillen;
TENTH CIRCUIT C . RICHARD NAIL; ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
Ramon A. A b a d i n , David B. Rothman, Lesiie
J. Lott, Michaei J. iHiger, Dennis G. Kainen,
Juiiet M, Roulhac, John H. Hickey, Dori
Foster-Morales; TWELETH CIRCUIT; L. Norman
Vaughan-Birch; THIRTEENTH CIRCUIT Wiliiam J,
Schifino, Jr., Lansing C. Scriven, Gwynne A.
Young, Michaei S, i-iooker; FOURTEENTH CIRCUIT
Ciifford W. Sanborn; FIFTEENTH CIRCUIT David C ,
Prather, Gregory W, C o i e m a n , Micheile R.
Suskauer, Lisa S. Smaii; SIXTEENTH CIRCUIT Edwin
A. Scales; SEVENTEENTH CIRCUIT Walter G o r d o n
C a m p b e l l , Jr., Nancy W. Grégoire, Eugene
K. Pettis, J a y C o h e n , Timothy L. Bailey;
EIGHTEENTH CIRCUIT Clifton A. McCleiland, Jr.;
NINETEENTH CIRCUIT John M, Stewart; TWENTIETH
CIRCUIT Laird A. Liie, Sooft W. Weinstein; OUT-
OE-STATE Richard A. Tanner, ian M. Comisky,
Eric L, Meeks. Brian D, Burgoon; PRESIDENT Y L D
Renée Thompson; PRESIDENT-ELECT YLD SEAN I
DESMOND; PUBLIC MEMBERS, Arnell Bryant-Willis,
Alvin V, Aisobrook
formation perception, and decision-
making makes us better counselors,
as well as advocates.
Don and Marty have written a
book for law students, Juris Types:
Learning Law through Self-Under-
standing (CAPT, vsrww.capt.org 2007),
applying this psychological theory
and communication information
to enhance students' experiences,
studies, and appreciation of diverse
communication and decision-making
styles. Reading through it reminded
me of the importance of understand-
ing our own biases, our natural barri-
ers toward complete understanding,
and the importance of respecting
other people's varying approaches.
I've also been thinking through
partisanship, not political, but from a
communication standpoint. I believe
in partisanship in some respects. I
love being engaged in clients' causes,
seeing the world through their eyes,
understanding and bonding with
them as we champion their causes.
But I must resist becoming too
wrapped up in only their views; I
must be disengaged enough to be a
cate, and keep my eyes open to other
points of view. Because without this
balance, I cannot properly prepare
my client's case and understand
the appeal of my opponent's claims.
No matter how thin the pancake,
goes the old saying, there's always
another side.
Interested in any of these con-
cepts? You can easily take the My-
ers-Briggs® test online, and there
are many resources available to
help you understand how you (and
others) obtain information, process
it, and make decisions. The more you
understand, the better lawyer you
can be.Q
' I think the better way to say this is
that law school provides the educational
foundation for practicing law, and that
we continue to learn how to do it well for
the rest of our lives.
^ ^

EDITORIAL BOARD

Chair David J, Federbush, Bethesda, MD;

Vice Chair Sorraya M. Soiages, Corai Gabies;
TyrinaD. Biomer,iHouston,TX;JeffreyL. Burns,
Ft, Waiton Beach; Catherine B, Chapman,
Tallahassee; Ryan S. Cobbs, West Palm
Beaoh; Daniei S. Dearing, Tailahassee;
Courtney D. Durham, inverness; H. Scott
Fingerhut, Miami; Gary S. Gaffney, Delray
Beach; Betsy E. Gailagher, Tampa; Michaei
M. Giei, Jacksonviiie; Juan C. Gomez,
Miami; Staniey G. Gorsica, Taiiahassee;
Cynthia L. Hail, Key West; Beveriy L. Hayes,
Tailohassee; Yeiizaveta B. Herman, West
Palm Beach; RiohardSJunnier, Tallahassee;
Martin i. Kiein, Palm Beach; Barbara Landau,
Ft. Lauderdale; Christopher S. Linde,
Orlando; R. Lynn Lovejoy, Pensaooia; M.
Leigh Macdonaid, Leesburg, VA; Diana L,
Martin, Paim Beoch Gardens; Donaid A.
Mihakovich, Tampa; Elena R, Minicucci,
Weston; Diane M, Moore,Taiiahassee; Lori L.
Moore, Ft. Myers; Monuei Pérez-Leiva, Miami
Beach; Sue-AnnN. Robinson, Ft. Lauderdaie;
Charies M. Samaha, St. Petersburg; Amy W.
Schrader, Tallahassee; Michaei D. Starks,
Orianda; Joshua J. Wagner, Daytona Beach;
R. Craig Waters, Taiiahassee; Amy C. Wells,
Tampa; Daniei Weston Ii, Tampa; Diana
Widjayo, Miami; Jennifer A. Winegardner,
Taiiahassee; Margoret E. Wood, West Paim
Beach; Board Liaison: Aivin V. Aisobrook,
Gainesviiie
OATH OF ADMISSION TO THE FLORIDA BAR
The general principles which should ever control the lawyer in the practice of the legal
profession are clearly set forth in the following oath of admission to the Bar, which the
lawyer is sworn on admission to obey and for the willful violation to which disbarment may
be had.
"I do solemnly swear:
"I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of
Florida;
"I will maintain the respect due to courts of justice and judicial officers;
"I will not counsel or maintain any suit or proceedings which shall appear to me to be
unjust, nor any defense except such as I believe to be honestly debatable under the law of
the land;
"I will employ for the purpose of maintaining the causes confided to me such means only
as are consistent with truth and honor, and will never seek to mislead the judge or jury by
any artifice or false statement of fact or law;
"I will maintain the confidence and preserve inviolate the secrets of my clients, and will
accept no compensation in connection with their business except from them or with their
knowledge and approval;
"1 will abstain from all offensive personality and advance no fact prejudicial to the honor
or reputation of a party or witness, unless required by the justice of the cause with which I
am charged;
"I will never reject, from any consideration personal to myself, the cause of the defense-
less or oppressed, or delay anyone's cause for lucre or malice. So help me God.'

6 THE FLORIDA BAR J0URNAL7JANUARY 2011

Copyright of Florida Bar Journal is the property of Florida Bar, Legal Publishing Department and its content
may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express
written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.