Who Speaks Like a Lawyer? Gender Bias in the Courtroom

Written by Matthew Dooley

As a member of my college’s mock trial team, I get a preview of the legal profession: the preparation, the public speaking, and the ways bias can influence how attorneys are perceived. When our team tries fictional cases at tournaments, we are judged by real attorneys (often older men).  We learn quickly that our demeanor matters just as much as our knowledge of

the case, but that demeanor isn’t judged the same way for everyone. For example, female competitors who speak assertively or forcefully are frequently scored down for being “too aggressive” or “bullying,” though I’ve never seen a male competitor receive similar feedback. After one trial last year, a male judge even told one of our female attorneys, “You were right about that objection by the way, but I wanted to overrule you anyway because you were getting really worked up and I wanted to see how you would react.” I haven’t had to worry as much about these kinds of scoring penalties or arbitrary punishments from judges, even though I too get “worked up” at times. Watching my female teammates receive patronizing critiques, especially after putting in hours of preparation, has been both frustrating and eye-opening. These experiences have led me to consider the barriers women face in the legal field and my role in challenging them.

Women pursuing careers in law may find themselves in a leaky pipeline: they graduate law school and are hired as associates at rates equal to men, but are gradually pushed out due to structural and interpersonal biases (Blickenstaff, 2005; Weiss, 2021). In the private sector, male attorneys earn about 20 percent more than female attorneys, and they are two to five times more likely to be promoted to high-ranking roles. These trends hold even when controlling for grades, hours worked, and experience in the field (Center on the Legal Profession, 2015). Beyond these quantitative disparities, many female attorneys report an unwelcoming culture at work, including sexist comments and a lack of female mentors or role models (Weiss, 2021). These experiences further create ‘leaks’ in the ‘pipeline,’ helping to explain women’s higher attrition rates and their underrepresentation in top leadership roles.

Decades of research have linked the systemic barriers that women face in the workplace to gendered stereotypes about who is fit to lead. Women are stereotypically described as warm, communal, and modest, whereas men are thought to be more assertive, ambitious, and decisive (Heilman, 2012; Koch et al., 2015). Eagly and Karau’s role congruity theory identifies how the mismatch between stereotypes about women (warm, communal) and stereotypes about leaders (assertive, decisive) limits women's opportunities (Eagly & Karau, 2002). Because attorneys are prototypically assertive and agentic, and stereotypes about women don’t always fit this mold, women in law face a unique double bind. Lawyers are expected to zealously and passionately represent their clients, but female litigators face penalties for displaying the assertiveness that their profession demands.

Attorney gender isn’t a consistent predictor of case outcomes, but it does shape how attorneys are perceived, evaluated, and given opportunities at work (Abrams & Yoon, 2007). I’ve begun to see this in mock trial settings: women do face backlash when they speak aggressively in the courtroom. Studies have revealed that women who adopt a forceful speaking style are rated as less convincing, competent, trustworthy, and likable, compared to men who speak in an identical manner (Carli, 1990; Hahn & Clayton, 1996). Indeed, expressing anger in the courtroom has differential effects depending on an attorney’s gender: while male outbursts are often interpreted as compelling and powerful, women expressing the same emotion are more likely to be labeled as “shrill” or “obnoxious” (Salerno et al., 2018). Because an attorney’s demeanor and speaking skills are routinely evaluated by jurors, co-workers, and potential clients, gender bias in these evaluations can carry serious professional consequences. In practice, an assertive female attorney may lose credibility with a jury, a promotion opportunity, or a client for behavior that would likely go unnoticed (or even rewarded) if exhibited by a male attorney (Lee, 2016; Salerno et al., 2018).

Understanding the research on gender bias and its effects on women in the workplace has made me more able to confront my own biases and address patterns of discrimination in the legal field. Though I always try to evaluate others fairly, I am aware that I likely have unconscious conceptions about how women ‘should’ communicate. And though I’ve never personally experienced the biases that female attorneys face, I still have a duty to understand and fight against these biases, whether they appear in myself or in others. One way to do this is by rejecting the assumption that things like leadership or effective speaking require gender-typed traits. Research shows that when evaluators focus on specific skills and behaviors rather than whether someone “fits” a leadership prototype, they make less biased decisions (Liu et al., 2023). Instead of asking “Does she seem like a leader?”, a question that invites stereotypes, we should be asking “Does she demonstrate strategic thinking, clear communication, and sound judgment?” This universal mindset approach could be valuable in legal settings. Recognizing that all people are capable of being effective and convincing litigators, regardless of their gender, natural tone, or chosen style, is an important step in ensuring that female attorneys are evaluated fairly.

Though I try to adopt a universal mindset and speak out against transgressions when I see them, I admit that I do not yet feel fully prepared to address the more subtle ways gender bias occurs in legal settings. Many of the bias trainings I’ve encountered present simple scenarios, asking participants how they would respond to a coworker’s egregiously bigoted behavior. In my experience, however, these moments of bias are often more subtle and come with some degree of plausible deniability. For example, someone who comments that a female attorney is “too aggressive” might justify it as a gender-neutral critique of her tone, even though comments like these can subtly reinforce expectations about how women should behave. In these situations, it can be difficult to know whether and how to intervene.

Even so, there are a number of practical steps other male allies and I can take to help support women in the legal field, especially in the subtle, “plausibly deniable” moments where bias often hides. On an interpersonal level, that starts with making women’s competence and contributions harder to overlook. I can call attention to female colleagues’ successes, amplify their ideas in male-dominated spaces, and create room for them to speak without being interrupted or dismissed. Just as importantly, I can have more direct conversations with other men about how men and women are evaluated differently, and about how feedback that sounds “neutral” (e.g., “too aggressive”) can function as a gendered penalty when it’s applied unevenly.

At the organizational level, allyship also means pushing for policies that reduce the structural “leaks” that drive women out of the profession. Gender bias lives not only in individual interactions but also in relational networks, hiring ladders, and HR practices (Stamarski & Son Hing, 2015). Firms can address this by building mentorship programs for junior female attorneys, conducting equal pay assessments, and strengthening promotion pathways so that advancement depends less on informal sponsorship and more on transparent criteria. Finally, because speaking evaluations carry so much weight in legal careers, it’s critical to improve how evaluators are prepared to assess advocacy. Implicit bias training can be one tool for those who routinely judge attorneys’ communication, such as law school professors, judges, and juries, so that women are evaluated on the quality of their arguments and advocacy rather than on whether their tone conforms to gender norms.

We all have a moral and professional responsibility to make sure everyone feels welcome and able to succeed in our workplaces. Through mock trial and research on legal settings, I’ve learned how gender stereotypes, especially those relating to assertive public speaking, can undermine a woman’s authority in the courtroom. I am drawn to the law because it presents an opportunity to fight injustice, and supporting women’s equality in the profession is one way I can start doing that well before I ever enter a real courtroom.

Matthew Dooley

Matthew is a junior at Hamilton College majoring in psychology and public policy

References

Abrams, D. S., & Yoon, A. H. (2007). The luck of the draw: Using random case assignment to investigate attorney ability. The University of Chicago Law Review, 74(4), 1145. https://doi.org/10.2307/20141859

Blickenstaff, J. C. (2005). Women and science careers: Leaky pipeline or gender filter? Gender and Education, 17(4), 369-386. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540250500145072

Carli, L. L. (1990). Gender, language, and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(5), 941-951. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.5.941

Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109(3), 573-598. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.109.3.573

Hahn, P. W., & Clayton, S. D. (1996). The effects of attorney presentation style, attorney gender, and juror gender on juror decisions. Law and Human Behavior, 20(5), 533-554. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01499040

Heilman, M. E. (2012). Gender stereotypes and workplace bias. Research in Organizational Behavior, 32, 113-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2012.11.003

Koch, A. J., D'Mello, S. D., & Sackett, P. R. (2015). A meta-analysis of gender stereotypes and bias in experimental simulations of employment decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(1), 128-161. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036734

Lee, C. (n.d.). Gender bias in the courtroom: Combatting implicit bias against women trial attorneys and litigators. Cardozo Journal of Law and Gender, 22, 229-252.  https://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1054&context=student_pubs

Liu, Z., Rattan, A., & Savani, K. (2023). Reducing gender bias in the evaluation and selection of future leaders: The role of decision-makers' mindsets about the universality of leadership potential. Journal of Applied Psychology, 108(12), 1924-1951. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001112

Salerno, J. M., Phalen, H. J., Reyes, R. N., & Schweitzer, N. J. (2018). Closing with emotion: The differential impact of male versus female attorneys expressing anger in court. Law and Human Behavior, 42(4), 385-401. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000292

Stamarski, C. S., & Son Hing, L. S. (2015). Gender inequalities in the workplace: The effects of organizational structures, processes, practices, and decision makers' sexism. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01400

Weiss, D. (2021, May 3). Why do female lawyers leave law firms? 'Blatantly unfair' compensation often cited, new ABA report says. American Bar Association. https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/why-do-female-lawyers-leave-law-firms-blatantly-unfair-compensation-often-cited-aba-report-says

Women as lawyers and leaders. (2015). Center on the Legal Profession. https://clp.law.harvard.edu/knowledge-hub/magazine/issues/women-as-lawyers-and-leaders/women-as-lawyers-and-leaders/