Incivility as Identity
Michigan State Law Review, Vol: 2020, Page: 939
2020
- 21Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage21
- Downloads13
- Abstract Views8
Article Description
Incivility can undermine the legal profession’s work and effectiveness. However, existing scholarship, focused on explaining lawyer incivility as an overextension of zealous advocacy, poor training, or a business-driven model of lawyering, has misconceived a key facet of incivility. Prevailing wisdom largely neglects that lawyers use incivility to react and position themselves within the sociopolitical norms of society in which they live. Civility (or the lack thereof) in the legal profession, may be less about clients and economic pressures than about lawyers affirming their political, class, and gender identities. Once the legal profession recognizes that civility is significantly about lawyers affirming an associative identity, not asserting a tactical advantage, it can begin to effectively create institutional structures that support civil interactions. This Article uses social and historical context to discuss how lawyers use civility or incivility to publicly proclaim group membership and identity affiliations. In today’s climate, there are three principal associations that acts of incivility trigger: (1) antielitism, (2) authenticity, and (3) adherence to traditional gender norms of masculinity and strength. When lawyers engage in action that is not civil, they self-identify with one or more of these traits. This Article argues civility today is significantly about lawyer identity formation and discusses institutional reforms that aim to establish new normative professional paradigms.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know