Skip Navigation


Law, Probability and Risk Advance Access originally published online on October 17, 2007
Law, Probability and Risk 2007 6(1-4):295-310; doi:10.1093/lpr/mgm016
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
6/1-4/295    most recent
mgm016v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Feigenson, N.
Right arrow Articles by Sherwin, R. K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author [2007]. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.

Thinking beyond the shown: implicit inferences in evidence and argument

Neal Feigenson{dagger}

Quinnipiac University School of Law, 275 Mt. Carmel Avenue, Hamden, CT 06518, USA

Richard K. Sherwin{ddagger}

New York Law School, 57 Worth Street, New York, NY 10012, USA

{dagger} Email: neal.feigenson{at}quinnipiac.edu

{ddagger} Email: rsherwin{at}nyls.edu

Received on 24 February 2007. Revised on 29 May 2007. Accepted on 31 May 2007.


  Abstract

Visual representations are especially well suited to the construction of implicit meanings. Like advocates in other fields, lawyers use visual displays to prompt cognitive and emotional associations of which viewers may not be aware and which, consequently, they are less likely to evaluate critically. The authors review some of the psychological and rhetorical effects of visual representations in general, discuss several examples of how legal visual displays encourage audiences to draw implicit inferences and argue for the importance of heightened visual literacy in improving our ability to understand the meanings and implications of visual advocacy within the legal system.

Keywords: trials; advocacy; rhetoric; visual theory; psychology; evidence

Presented at the workshop on ‘Graphic and visual representations of evidence and inference in legal settings’ at Cardozo School of Law, New York City, 28–29 January 2007.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.