| Title |
Exploring Lawyer–Client Interaction
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Psychological Injury and Law, May 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12207-012-9120-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nieke A. Elbers, Kiliaan A. P. C. van Wees, Arno J. Akkermans, Pim Cuijpers, David J. Bruinvels |
| Abstract |
Personal injury victims involved in compensation processes have a worse recovery than those not involved in compensation processes. One predictor for worse recovery is lawyer engagement. As some people argue that this negative relation between lawyer engagement and recovery may be explained by lawyers' attitude and communications to clients, it seems important to investigate lawyer-client interaction. Although procedural justice and therapeutic jurisprudence had previously discussed aspects relevant for lawyer-client interaction, the client's perspective has been rather ignored and only few empirical studies have been conducted. In this qualitative study, 21 traffic accident victims were interviewed about their experiences with their lawyer. Five desirable characteristics for lawyers were identified: communication, empathy, decisiveness, independence, and expertise. Communication and empathy corresponded with aspects already discussed in literature, whereas decisiveness, independence and expertise had been addressed only marginally. Further qualitative and quantitative research is necessary to establish preferable lawyer characteristics and to investigate what would improve the well-being of personal injury victims during the claims settlement process. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 60% |
| Spain | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 20% |
| Professor | 4 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 10 | 40% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 24% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 3 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 July 2022.
All research outputs
#3,112,542
of 22,835,198 outputs
Outputs from Psychological Injury and Law
#15
of 181 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,022
of 163,707 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychological Injury and Law
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,835,198 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 181 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 163,707 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them