Hi all–back from soggy Texas and the Works in Progress conference. I hope to post several of the papers that were presented (nudge to others to send me!) and am delighted to start with Lauren Newell’s paper on Rebooting Empathy for the Digital Generation. This is the continuation of her work that she started in Redefining Attention (and Revamping the Legal Profession?) for the Digital Generation.
There is a growing preference in today’s technology-saturated society for online interaction via email, text messages, social networks, and instant messaging, rather than in-person interactions. For today’s young people—the “Digital Generation”—this is more than a mere preference; it is a way of life. Social scientists have suggested that empathy has declined in recent years among members of the Digital Generation. Some researchers speculate that the rising prominence of information and communication technologies (“ICTs”) in everyday life may be contributing to this decline.
Today’s young ICT devotees are tomorrow’s future legal professionals. And when the Digital Generation enter legal practice they will be called upon to counsel, to negotiate, to advocate, and to judge. To succeed in legal practice the Digital Generation will need to experience empathy. There are clear negative implications for the legal profession’s future if successful legal practice requires empathy but ICT usage is impeding the Digital Generation’s development of it.
This paper will propose a working definition of empathy and considers the role of empathy in the practice of law. Then, it will analyze current research linking ICT usage to the decline of empathy in the Digital Generation. Finally, it will propose strategies to increase empathy among the Digital Generation so that members of this generation may become successful legal practitioners despite—or perhaps even because of—their use of ICTs.
Having read the first article, I am definitely looking forward to the next one!
There is no doubt that ICTs have become extremely prevalent within the Millennial Generation. It only takes an appearance at a family holiday party to see nieces, nephews, younger cousins, etc. burying their faces into any screen available. While the use of ICTs seems prevalent with younger adults, the frequency of use is not that much different for Gen-Xers, Baby Bombers, and even from the Silent Generation. I know individuals from those generations who are more attached to social media and staring at screens than people of my generation. I guess my further question on this research would be: does increased ICT use reduce empathy and interpersonal skills in these older generations—those that allegedly gained better experience and skills in face-to-face interactions and empathy in the pre-iPhone era.
One thing to keep in mind—lawyers function to serve the client’s needs and interests. As for the effect on an effective legal practice, while empathy and interpersonal skills are surely necessary, this trend in ICT use is continuing and, thus, the future clients will likely be active ICT users. They might want a lawyer who is more familiar with these emerging methods of communication. I believe that to be an effective lawyer, one must speak in a way the client best understands—both in terms of the content of a lawyer’s communications and in the medium that the lawyer utilizes. There are benefits to having a face-to-face meeting with a client, and I do not mean to suggest that this type of communication should be abandoned. I do think that knowledgeable use of digital communication will become more vital to a successful legal practice as the younger users of ICTs become tomorrow’s clients. Plus, clients are more likely to be comfortable when communications come in a form that they prefer using. As time moves forward, I would not be surprised to see lawyer-client communications involve much more email, text message, and other digital communication mediums. Having an attorney who also knows and utilizes ICTs effectively may become a client demand. And, having a generation grow up using ICTs would be more effective at meeting the client’s communication expectations than those people who still use flip phones.
As with most things, the digital generation’s love affair and abundant use of electronic communication requires delicate balancing. I, like others, am not surprised to hear about the correlations in Newell’s article, but I fear that the solutions most propose are the rather simplistic “Just use your devices less and talk to people!” lines.
We must remember that we live in an astonishing point in history, with relatively unfettered access to the collective works of mankind at our fingertips, accessible within a few moments in some instances. The mere possibility of overindulging should not preclude society from celebrating and incorporating these technological innovations. For attorneys, this means that one can expand on areas of expertise and potentially take on a higher client load than a similarly skilled attorney in generations past.
Of course there are limits that should be set on an individual basis. I’m curious to see how my generation modifies its behavior, both professionally and in private life. I don’t doubt there are many of us who set limits of their own in regards to technology (no phones at the dinner table, for example), and as this generation become parents and raise the next generation of ICTs, I wonder what societal norms will develop along the way to ensure that the ability to socialize in a one on one setting does not completely diminish.
No one that is currently in law school grew up with the social media and communication technology that is so prevalent today. No one had their faces glued to their smartphones until a few years ago. Therefore, empathy and other basic social skills were developed without the interference of social media. The question to me then is without the consistent exercising of these skills can they degrade? I tend to think they can, but I do not believe empathy fades away easily. The inability to communicate effectively face to face and just general social anxiety are more of a problem then the loss of empathy. Anxiety is getting in the way of people conveying their empathy. Once today’s law students get into practice and regularly meet with their clients, that anxiety should fade and effective conveyance of their empathy should follow.
I found this relationship between the “digital generation” and the decline in empathy to be very interesting and sadly, not surprising. I think my generation, including myself, heavily rely on technology, especially social media. These forms of communication take away the face-to-face communication that is needed in a legal profession. As a lawyer, I think it’s very important to feel for your client and be able to put yourself in his or her shoes. One of the main goals of being a lawyer in my opinion, is to be a person for others; however, it is difficult to do that when there is a constant barrier (digital communication) that sometimes makes it easier and quicker to communicate.
Although sending an email or a message over social media is a quicker way to reach out to a client or coworker, this easier form of communication does subtract the empathy from the equation. Empathy for another plays a critical role in advocating for a client and really understanding their needs and wants. I think it’s important to remember as a lawyer, that we are first advocates. We must ask ourselves, “How can we advocate for our clients if we don’t take the time to understand them?” I look forward to hearing more about this study and learning how to overcome this “digital generation” barrier in communication. As a young lawyer, I hope to not forget the power of empathy and the role it plays in my clients’ lives.
It is hard for me to not take this conclusion personally as I feel that my ability to empathize is one of my strongest qualities that was instilled in me by my family at a young age and refined through my personal experience with others. However, this quality could only be shaped (for me) by interacting with other people in their presence, and as such I cannot disagree with the idea that more frequent use of informal communication leads to less empathy as a whole.
Communication in the digital age is based on convenience and when convenience is the pre-dominant factor in how we communicate with each other, it will be difficult to fully empathize with others (especially clients, who also act and communicate based on their convenience). Certain clients prefer to meet in person, which is great; others prefer to tailor their communications to their schedules and utilize more informal methods. I am not positive that trading empathy for convenience is necessarily a bad thing. It depends on your circumstances and relationships (e.g. – staying in touch with acquaintances on social media as opposed to not having social media and forgetting them completely).
This study will be very interesting as it continues. I would like to see an elaboration on this as members of the digital age become parents. Will we teach our children the importance of empathizing with others or as a whole will our overwhelming nature of communicating conveniently and informally affect our parenting in negative ways?
I agree with the majority of this article, however there are some points that I do not fully agree with. Overall, it is true that today’s generation of young people are so consumed by technology and instant gratification, but with the continued rise of technology this has become a universal problem, not just a problem of today’s youth. Today you see not only young people, but also older adults with their faces buried in their smart technology or on an internet search browser and this has affected our ability to multitask and our ability to focus.
While many of us believe that having multiple tabs open while watching tv and responding to text or other electronic communications is actually strengthening our multitasking ability, it is, in fact, causing us to half-focus on what otherwise might be an important task or assignment, leading us to turn in sub-standard work.
However, as future lawyers, this could actually benefit our practice down the road if we understand how to take advantage of this technology. By this I mean that because today’s world is so focused on instant gratification due to our dependency on technology, many clients become frustrated and angered when their attorney does not return an email, a phone call, or even a text message within an hour or so. By having technology readily available throughout the day, lawyers can respond to their client’s emails or phone calls promptly, letting the client know that they will look into the issue and get back to them after they have had the chance to fully research the issue. Although this does not necessarily answer the client’s question, it gives the client assurance that the lawyer is working on their case. However, being a slave to technology as a lawyer can create problems if the lawyer is always checking his phone during meetings with another clients, with opposing counsel, etc. During times when the lawyer’s attention should be focused on another person or task, the lawyer should absolutely not be checking his devices during these periods as it will create the attention and focus problems discussed in the article.
Personally I recognize that my generation has been getting more and more consumed by our phones and technology. While I do not feel that I struggle with empathy, I do feel that the increase in technology makes me less outgoing in general. I find myself struggling to form the more meaningful friendships that I had from my youth or even from undergrad. Partially I think technology may play a role in this, allowing me to ignore my surroundings, but at the same time I think it is also a matter of where I am in life. I don’t have the time or frankly the energy sometimes to talk to other people and at times even to care about them. I know this is somewhat callus, but that’s my reality.
I agree and disagree with this article. First and foremost, I agree with this article because our world, including our legal community, is almost completely digitalized. Face-to-face conversations have gone to the wayside, likewise for even talking to one another over the phone. We constantly communicate through text messages and email. Heck, even if we have a question for a professor about a certain class, we seek out an answer via email, instead of simply walking into their office and having a conversation with them. Moreover, a natural result of this constant digital communication is the possibility of the content losing its message or being misconstrued.
This directly relates to expressing empathy toward other individuals in the digital world, especially our future clients, because we cannot see their expressions or hear their general, good or bad, voice inflections. However, while I acknowledge that a negative correlation exists between expressing empathy and communicating via the digital world, I do not believe that our ability to express empathy is entirely impeded by our presence in the digital space. It is quite possible to dictate our language so as to duplicate and elicit empathy to the best of our ability. Yes, the digital divide will hamper expressing empathy toward clients. Still, we have to adapt to where the market is headed, and that is toward one that will be almost wholly consumed digitally.
At any rate, it will be interesting to read the rest of the article and analyze the proposed strategies to “increase empathy among the Digital Generation so that members of this generation may become successful legal practitioners.” As a student who extensively studied and work in new media during my undergraduate years, I am eager to see what is next.
I agree that my current generation in general is very attached to social media and technology in general. However, many of us grew up for the majority of our lives without the luxury of smart phones and the instant connection to anyone, at anytime, at any place. I think that we as a generation grew up with empathy skills and perhaps in some cases those skills have been dulled because of the new age of digital technology. In some cases maybe we just need to re-learn empathy skills. However, I don’t think being constantly connected to social media and having empathy skills have to be mutually exclusive ideas. I think many of us have a persona that we use online and then of course our regular persona that we use with in-person dealings.
Technology is only going to continue to evolve and make things like social media easier for our generation to access. Does that mean that our generation’s empathy will continue to decline? Personally, I don’t think so. I think lawyers are more than capable enough to compartmentalize our social media lives and our real lives.
I agree with this article that today’s generation and the younger generations have become too dependent on technology and lack the social skills needed for face-to-face interaction with others. Today’s generation tend to interact with one another through technology, whether by text massaging or social media. Having personal face-to-face interaction is a thing of the past. Do not get me wrong, technology is very beneficial to today’s society. However, those same technological advances that generate great benefits to today’s society, also hinder today’s generation and younger generations from developing the valuable social skills needed to be an effective attorney. Part of being an effective attorney is being able to communicate well with not only clients but also judges. An attorney cannot communicate to a client or a judge solely through electronic communications because an attorney needs to develop a working and trusting relationship with these individuals.
Personally, I prefer to interact with clients and others through more personal forms, such as in-person meetings and telephone calls. There are times contact through e-mails are effective modes of communication, but an attorney needs to be able to communicate effectively in person. One of the downfalls to electronic communications is that it hinders the attorney’s ability to connect with a client. The more personal forms of communications (i.e. in-person meetings and phone calls) allow the attorney to develop a rapport with a client and become more empathetic of the client’s interests. By being more empathetic towards a client, an attorney will be better suited to represent a client effectively. I feel my generation and future generations will need to be able to find that delicate balance of using the beneficial technology at our disposal and the valuable, “old-school” social skills in order to effectively represent a client.
While I agree that we rely too much on technology, I do not necessarily agree that technology is driving us further apart. People now move around much more than before, and it is more difficult to keep in touch without technological advances. Many of my friends have moved away and through technology I can still interact with them on a daily basis. I think this leads to more empathy than less.
There are people who abuse technology, but its like anything else in life, you need to make it work for you. In class this semester, we were not allowed computers and I believe it helped me learn better, but for some it may not work as well. We each have to be cognizant of ourselves and use technology wisely. As lawyers, we must work with what we are given, and that includes technology. I think it will be even more widespread in the future than it is today and we must keep up with the times.
I find myself torn when between the reasoning of this article and my own interpretation of a technologically-driven society, or “digital generation.” On one side you have individuals that claim that we are too dependent on technology; that we can’t spend more than 5 minutes without looking at our phones or some other device. While, I agree with this notion, I also see the value of our inclination towards technology.
For me it’s the desire to communicate that has fueled this digital age we live in, and through this communication you can achieve empathy. Whether it is a face-to-face interaction or one that is done through texting, I don’t believe that empathy is lost. I will admit that it is difficult to evoke and perceive emotion through a computer or cellphone screen, but that doesn’t mean it is impossible.
A interesting idea that has been going around is that the legal profession must adapt to the society which it is being applied. I entirely agree with this. If said society is becoming more technologically inclined then the professional world, in this case the legal world, shouldn’t reject the idea of adapting to it. Instead, it should look at technology and these new methods of interaction as tools to enhance the legal system. It’s honestly a complex topic to place into words, but nonetheless a very interesting one.
There would certainly seem to be a correlation between the rise of use of ICTs and a lack of attention/empathy. However, like most ways of life, I have to think the legal profession will be able to adapt and evolve along with society. For me, I am more interested in the changes the legal industry can and will make in the future, particularly in terms of the billable hour.
As the article points out, the “digital generation” loves to multitask, and I have to think there is going to be changes coming to what defines a “billable hour” when a good chunk of that hour will be spent subconsciously checking e-mail, Facebook, Twitter, etc.
I do agree that technology have taken away from face to face interactions. People will be on say their phones at dinner instead of interacting with one another, but it also helps connect friends and families who live far away from each other. I feel that empathy may go down in the broader sense between everyday interactions with people in public. But I do disagree that empathy has gone down in interactions between family and friends because it causes our generation to go the extra mile to interact with people we care about. When a lawyer is interacting with a client, they want to help them and get them to the state they want to be in. Lawyer’s will go the extra mile to help their clients and to further their goals.
However, I do believe that not everyone will take extra steps and that could be an issue when it comes to technology. It is much easier to just send a text or email instead of picking up the phone to call someone or meet them in person. It really depends on the person themselves and their personalities. If they have the willingness to go the extra mile they will, I also believe that would apply to past generations as well. The addition of technology has just added another obstacle for our generation, but some will overcome it.
I disagree with the premises of this article, that technology will make future lawyers less empathetic and less able to communicate. While it may be true that some people prefer technology communication to talking face to face, I don’t think these are the types of people that will enroll in law school and become lawyers. Being around a building full of law students, I notice that most people are very friendly and outgoing. I think it is these types of outgoing people who want to be lawyers, not people who don’t like social interaction and would prefer to communicate via technology. Maybe this trend will change in the future, but students currently in law school now have grown up with technology. They are part of the digital generation and I don’t see a lack of empathy at all.
I do agree with this article to an extent. I do agree that my generation does have difficulty interacting outside of the digital world. It is very evident when observing any group of young people. They are all together, but no one is talking and everyone is on their phones texting, tweeting, or posting about something. Everyone has something to say and is very good at conveying their opinions to the world.
However, for most of the members of my generation, this can only be done electronically. People today are very talkative, just not to each other. I don’t know how this came to be. Some claim that it is ease of accessibility, but really what is more accessible than someone standing right in front of you. I think a lot of it has to do with fear. Many people have opinions and they want to share them, but they are afraid of being told that they are wrong. When you post on the internet, it is usually under a screen name and, with the exception of whoever you tell, most people will never know who you are. It gives many people a sense of freedom to express themselves, good or bad, without a sense of consequence.
But, this is unrealistic. The professional world, especially for lawyers, is not electronic. Court proceedings and client interviews are not conducted on Facebook and Twitter. They are conducted in person. The people of my generation, as a whole, are really struggling with in person communication. Social cues and non-verbal cues are things that people just do not know how to pick up on, or it is very rare when someone does. That is because there is an extreme lack of face-to-face communication these days. This is only going to damage professional capabilities of my generation and the future ones to come. The legal profession could evolve, but I don’t think it should. Some things can not be done through technology and the legal profession is one of them. Each client has a difficult and complicated story, you can’t understand that through a text or e-mail. I think this generation needs to reinvent the wheel and work on communication skills for the sake of the future of the professional atmosphere.
I do not think that my generation is less empathetic because they are more heartless or anything like that, I just think my generation is struggling with communicating and as a result lacks the ability to be empathetic. This is not a skill that I believe can really be taught. It is something you learn through experience, especially trial and error. But, with technology today people feel that they can easily by-pass the awkward or difficult conversations. If anything, that is where the lack of empathy is coming from. One cannot empathize with something that they themselves have never experienced.
If increased technology is leading to a loss of empathy in today’s generation (generally) shouldn’t this generation begin figuring out ways to serve its own generation and future generations rather than try and retroactively learn this skill? If technology leads to the loss of empathy, the generations that the Tech Generation will serve will only have more technology at its disposal. Thus, generations that succeed ours will have even less empathy and may not want or expect this from an attorney. It seems to be in this generation’s best interest to find out what future generations will want because that is who this generation will be working with. Of course you can never take the necessity of empathy and actual human aspect out of the courtroom and litigating a case, but in many other aspects of being a good attorney I am not so sure that having empathy is as critical as it may be perceived from reading this article. I think attorneys need to adapt to what the future generations want rather than to what the traditional sense of being a (generally) good attorney may mean.
The moment I saw the heading to this article, I knew I wanted to read more. I agree with almost everything this has to say. Today’s generation is very tuned in to social media and we are reliant on the technology we carry in our hands. We have come to a road block in our society where we can no longer have proper face-to-face interactions without feeling awkward or having to look down at our phone to make sure we are staying connected. Teaching a generation like this can pose difficulties and while I don’t believe we fear the social interactions, we just don’t know how to handle them anymore. This can carry through to our clients. We want them to feel secure in our lawyer abilities but if we only communicate through email or texts, we become disconnected from the situation.
This will continue to be a highly discussed topic, and I’m interested to see where it goes. It is an important topic because technology isn’t going anywhere and is only becoming more prominent. As a society we need to remember how valuable face-to-face communication can be and we shouldn’t rely so heavily on technology.
Although we live in a day with hundreds of vehicles for socialization, today’s society is actually less social than ever before. Our understandings, our shared feelings, our general self-fulfillment comes from friend-requests on Facebook or the “likes” on an Instagram photo.
That being said, I don’t think today’s generation puts lesser value or cannot attain self-fulfillment in an organic social atmosphere. We just don’t know how to. How can we possibly see someone’s emotions when our eyes are set on a screen and not on raised eyebrows? How can we hear someone’s fear when listen to beepy notifications and not the tremble in someone’s voice?
As Aristotle said, we are social beings: we cannot flourish in our life or work without fulfilling that social compound of our genetic makeup. On a micro-level, we cannot be effective lawyers without understanding and empathizing with our clients. Now, however, true socialization skills are a learned strategy, similar to reading or math (which ironically also declines due to savvy spell-check and calculation technologies). Social empathy sounds like a basic skill, sure—but now, it is a difficult skill, an essential skill, that ought to be taught.
“Teaching to the Digital Generation”
My thoughts on this article is that I fully agree with it. Today’s men and women are wholly reliant on technology to get them not only throughout the day, but also through life as a whole. This means less face to face communication with not only family and friends but also with clients. This also relates to less empathy shown to clients that may need counseling and guidance in their legal advice. I am interested to see how the legal profession evolves and relates to the advances in technology and how the profession deals with communication by technology instead of face to face interaction.
Frankly, I am not surprised with this correlation. One of the more common observations I hear from my mentors is how important it is for an attorney to be able to empathize with whoever walks through their door. Yet in the same breath, my mentors usually add that this skill is under-developed in law school students. I will admit that I struggle to provide empathy, especially while dealing with particularly unpleasant clients. Consequently, my mentors and I have discussed the importance of focus and empathy, and they have provided me with recommendations to grow these qualities. I like to think these conversations have helped me nurture my ability to empathize. However, I am curious to see what strategies Lauren Newell recommends to increase empathy in the Digital Generation.