[ad_1]
Research shows that a male lawyer’s perceived masculinity is correlated with their likelihood of winning a case in the US Supreme Court. Lawyers who speak in softer tones are more likely to win. The court was established in 1789 and Taft served as both President and Chief Justice.
The United States Supreme Court prides itself on being the fairest and smartest judicial arena in the country, but those gowned judges may not be completely impartial in one respect: the human voice. According to research, there is a correlation between how masculine a male lawyer looks and how likely he is to win a case. It turns out that an authoritative male voice doesn’t necessarily satisfy the court. The researchers asked a group of volunteers to listen to 60 audio recordings of male lawyers speaking at the high court, and then to tell how they perceived the attractiveness, education, intelligence, masculinity and safety of the speaker. When the researchers compared the findings to the final decisions made by the court in each case, the only factor that appeared to contribute to the court’s decision was the lawyer’s perceived masculinity. Lawyers who spoke in softer tones were more likely to win. Lead researcher Alan Yu of the University of Chicago said the findings came as a surprise and require further study. “Lawyers who think they’re going to lose may project a different kind of voice, perhaps overcompensating by sounding more masculine,” he said.
The highlights of the high court:
Two judges were depicted on US currency: John Marshall ($500 note) and Salmon P. Chase ($10,000 note); neither is around.
The Supreme Court was established in 1789 but did not have a permanent seat until 1935.
William Howard Taft is the only person to have served as both President of the United States and Chief of the Supreme Court.
