CHAPTER 1
Shades of Quiet: Distinctions Among Introversion, Shyness, and Social Anxiety
Society tends to clump together the classifications of introversion, shyness, and social anxiety when labeling quiet individuals.15 Quiet folks frequently are branded as introverted, shy, distant, standoffish, unapproachable, antisocial, or aloof, or they are tagged as wallflowers, loners, recluses, or outsiders. These hasty characterizations often are technically inaccurate, and they jumble distinct psychological classifications and personality traits. Each categorization invokes discrete manifestations, implications, strengths, and challenges for law students and lawyers. An individual might fall into just one, or more than one, category. For instance, many introverted law students and lawyers are not shy or socially anxious at all; they are confident speakers when they are ready to communicate. By nature, they simply prefer thinking and writing over talking. They are internally methodical and, therefore, they might appear to take longer than some extroverts in processing complex legal analyses (extroverts tend to think aloud). Further, introverts renew their energy through solitude instead of social engagement. In contrast, other introverted law students and lawyers suffer a substantial amount of stress when pressured into mimicking an extroverted lawyer role or persona; fear of judgment sparks shyness or a more extreme state known as social anxiety. This chapter explains the science behind all three categories. For quiet law students and lawyers who seek to better understand the impactful roles they can play in the legal profession, an important first step is enhanced self-awareness to determine which of these categories resonate.
As a law professor over the past nine years at three schools in New York and California (and as a visiting professor at a law school in Italy), I can confirm that introverted, shy, and socially anxious students occupy our law school classrooms. Many such students tarry outside my faculty office doorway, awaiting a lull in writing conferences. They flock to public speaking anxiety workshops. Some struggle in oral arguments, despite excellent brief writing and valiant and dogged preparation. They dispatch countless emails, confiding that they need help but do not know where to turn. Further validating my conviction about the prevalence of these students in the law school environment, befuddled yet determined legal writing professors often gather around the podium after presentations on this topic at legal conferences around the country. They aspire to know how they might better help their anxious students cope with the Socratic Method and oral advocacy assignments.
In a research survey I conducted in 2010 and 2011, when I began to study introversion in the law context, I queried deans of students and directors of academic support at the nation’s top 100 law schools. I asked them whether their students seek assistance with public speaking anxiety, and if their schools offer any formal program, workshop, or course to focus on this issue. Forty-two of the schools responded: The majority of respondents acknowledged that yes, a number of students seek guidance for this concern every year; and no, unfortunately, their schools do not provide formal programs to address anxiety toward interpersonal interaction in the legal context. Most law schools furnish academic support programs in which trained advisors mentor students in test taking, outlining, fundamental writing skills, and bar exam strategy. Further, most law schools provide substantive, procedural, and stylistic instruction in the 1L year on how to deliver an oral argument. However, my survey indicated that at that time, very few law schools tackled the public speaking anxiety component from an underlying psychological standpoint. Only two schools confirmed that they offered mentoring and one-on-one workshops, to give students a forum for practicing oral arguments with the specific aim of reducing anxiety toward the assignment. Although law school academic support programs and mental health support groups within bar associations aspire to reduce students’ and lawyers’ anxiety, a specific focus on introversion, shyness, and social anxiety is relatively new to the profession. Lately, the legal community has begun to take notice. In February 2016, the American Bar Association (ABA) Young Lawyers Division and the ABA Journal teamed up to offer a webinar that addressed the impactful role that introversion and introverts can and should play in the legal profession.
Part of the problem historically has been that not everyone understands the important distinctions among extroversion, introversion, shyness, and social anxiety. This is especially true in the legal context, in which quietude and self-reflection traditionally have not been emphasized. Further, the common misbelief is that everyone can push through interpersonal reticence with enough moxie, preparation, or rehearsal. This “just do it” approach—without self-awareness and strategic planning to address and manage the roots of an individual’s instinctive resistance toward social interaction—can heighten instead of mitigate anxiety.
Instead, quiet law students and lawyers who yearn to tap into their formidable lawyer voices first must learn the differentiations among extroversion, introversion, shyness, and social anxiety—to self-assess. Then, they can embark on a personally tailored path to capitalize effectively on innate strengths and reduce anxiety toward interactive legal discourse. Understanding the scientific difference between introversion and extroversion can be transformative in a quiet lawyer’s professional development. It can illuminate the internal conflict that naturally flares when an individual attempts to force extroversion instead of realizing, appreciating, and cultivating one’s effectiveness as an introverted advocate. After recognizing this friction—perhaps for the first time—and subsequently reevaluating the role of quiet strength in the legal arena, introverts can make subtle adjustments in attitude, mental and physical approaches, and communication techniques to showcase a more naturally powerful persona, which inevitably reduces stress. The second half of this book describes a seven-step process for achieving this goal.
In contrast to introverts, shy and socially anxious individuals manifest a more deeply rooted fear of judgment and criticism that fosters self-censorship and restraint in interpersonal interaction. With similar self-study (through the seven steps) and increased conscious attention, individuals who experience a more intense version of stress in law-related performance events can work on identifying the historical roots of their apprehension, and then make potent changes to mental and physical approaches to interpersonal exchanges in the legal arena. For now, let’s start by differentiating introversion, shyness, and social anxiety.
INTROVERSION
So, what precisely is an introvert, and who are the introverted law students and lawyers? In everyday parlance, we stereotype extroverts as gregarious and outgoing, and introverts as reserved and possibly even socially detached. These definitions are not accurate or complete. According to the Myers & Briggs Foundation,16 Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung originally “used the words to describe the preferred focus of one’s energy on either the outer or the inner world. Extraverts17 [sic] orient their energy to the outer world, while [i]ntroverts orient their energy to the inner world.”18 Extroverts ramp up and maintain energy by infiltrating and soaking up their surroundings, intermingling with people, engaging, talking, and interacting—through coffee dates, parties, group exercise classes, teamwork, FaceTime, or Skype telephone chats. An extrovert is more likely than an introvert to perk up at the idea of scheduling a first date, attending a party where many guests are strangers, chatting with a fellow passenger on an airplane, cheering in a spinning class, talking to newcomers at the dog park, shaking hands with or hugging a neighbor at church during introductions, working in pairs or on teams in an interactive classroom exercise, or tossing around ideas in an office brainstorming session.
Introverts certainly are capable of exerting energy in public, and they can be quite adept in the art of social engagement when they want or need to be. However, eventually, a long span of human interface saps an introvert’s energy, like air escaping from a punctured inflatable raft. Introverts’ social engagements typically have a shorter shelf life than their extroverted counterparts. An expiration alarm eventually sounds in the introvert’s mind, signaling the time to retreat to a quiet haven for reenergization.19 Because introverts’ energy drains more swiftly than extroverts’,20 at some point, they slam into a wall of social exhaustion and must retreat or their temperaments can shift rapidly. Sophia Dembling, author on introversion, sums it up perfectly: “We’re fine, we’re fine, we’re fine, we’re okay, we’re kind of okay, we’re getting tired, we’re getting really tired, boom, we’re bitchy.”21
In the recovery stage, introverts stockpile renewed verve through solitude, quiet, and internal sanctuary. After a social or professional foray, an introvert might hibernate at home, take a walk alone, spend time with a pet (who might stare reverently but won’t expect energetic conversation), listen to music, paint, strum a guitar, exercise, read, write, binge-watch a favorite television show, or simply rest. An introvert might turn off or avoid the phone, or communicate solely through text messaging or e mail, rather than live or by speaking on the phone, to the chagrin of extroverted friends and family who “just want to hear your voice.”
On a day-to-day basis, an introvert might be perfectly happy and anxiety-free researching and writing, texting and e mailing, sitting quietly in a meeting while pondering ideas and taking notes, engaging with a close friend or colleague one-on-one in attentive exchange, sampling hors-d’oeuvres at a cocktail party without feeling compelled to chat with anyone yet, and working independently. This behavior does not make the introvert antisocial or misanthropic. Dr. Laney vividly notes that introverts “are not scaredy cats, shrinking violets, or self-absorbed loners.”22 Yet, force an introvert into a lengthy multi-party conference call, group work, sharing ideas before she is ready, party games, ice-breakers, or role play? Internal cringe for many of us. Pressuring an introvert to play a trust game too soon with a co-worker or high-five a sweaty stranger in a spinning class can launch a prickly case of hives.23
The divergence in the way introverts and extroverts produce, derive, and sustain energy has very tangible manifestations in how these two categories of people navigate life, process complex information, communicate thoughts and opinions, make decisions, and interact with other humans. These are highly relevant considerations when analyzing the differences in how introverts and extroverts approach—and will thrive best in—law school and law practice. Generally, according to Cain, introverts “listen more than they talk, think before they speak, and often feel as if they express themselves better in writing than in conversation.”24 As we explore in Chapter 3, these traits are well-suited for the legal profession. Yet, law school and law practice tend to push the extrovert exemplar. Many introverted law students and lawyers are patient listeners, deep thinkers, methodical processors of information, careful decision-makers, and thoughtful speakers—when they are ready to share. To accomplish these tasks, these individuals crave quiet, they limit overstimulation, they minimize interruptions (to self and to others), and they work in solitude. They treasure authenticity (and therefore experience internal conflict at advice like “fake it till you make it”), and they resist pressure to be something they are not. The next few sections of this chapter place each of these introvert traits and tendencies within the current context of legal education and practice. Chapter 2 then analyzes the effects of traditional legal education models and law practice on the stress and anxiety levels of quiet individuals. Chapter 3 rouses introverted, shy, and socially anxious law students and lawyers to serve as change agents—fostering greater empathy, intellectual humility, and inclusion within our profession—leading into the seven-step process in the second half of the book. Finally, Appendices A and B offer suggestions for legal educators and law practice mentors to champion impactful, quiet advocates.
INTROVERTS PREFER LISTENING TO TALKING, AND PROCESS INFORMATION INTERNALLY, METHODICALLY, AND DEEPLY
Introverts are good listeners25 and deep thinkers.26 Although being a rapt listener is an asset as a lawyer, the act of listening also can be energy-depleting for introverts because “we pay attention.”27 We process significant amounts of data before we speak. In dialogue, many introverts naturally listen, pause, think, anticipate, reflect, sometimes reconsider, and possibly even mentally rehearse phrasing and language choices before reacting to a question or statement.28 Some extroverts might perceive this sequence as socially sluggish or uncommunicative. However, Dr. Laurie Helgoe notes that “[i]ntroverts think before speaking, and need time within conversations to develop their ideas and responses”;29 they are not avoiding communication but rather internally gearing up in an effort to do it well. Dr. Jennifer Kahnweiler agrees: “Even in casual conversations, they consider others’ comments carefully and stop and reflect before responding. They know how to use the power of the pause.”30 The character John Cage on the popular 1990s television legal drama Ally McBeal was a quirky introverted trial lawyer known for announcing in open court, “I’m going to take a moment,” or “I need to take a moment,” while pondering his next riposte. The pause gave his brain the power surge to craft an ensuing legal zinger.
Because introverts habitually seize mental lulls to reflect,31 their thinking process can appear slower than extroverts’, who often muse aloud, firing off thoughts and ideas more rapidly. As Dembling points out, “Introverts are kinda slowpokey in our thinking. Gears in our heads seem to turn long and ponderously before cranking out an idea. When we’re concentrating, we can’t easily switch attention from that task to another.”32 Introverts deliberate before reacting to a thought;33 they mull “things around to examine every angle first.”34 Some introverts rework and vet thoughts in their heads so extensively that they “edit [themselves] into silence.”35
Science explains the introvert’s assiduous thinking process. Researchers indicate that introverts have more blood coursing to their brains36 than extroverts, which links to intensified stimulation and sensitivity. Further (and fascinatingly!), introverts’ and extroverts’ blood apparently journeys along diverse brain highways.37 Dr. Laney describes an experiment by Dr. Debra Johnson that contrasts introverts’ and extroverts’ blood movement:38
The introverts’ blood flowed to the parts of the brain involved with internal experiences like remembering, solving problems, and planning. This pathway is long and complex … The extroverts’ blood flowed to the areas of the brain where visual, auditory, touch, and taste (excluding smell) sensory processing occurs. Their main pathway is short and less complicated.39
Scientists also note that introverts’ and extroverts’ “dominant” brain passageways employ different neurotransmitters:40 acetylcholine for introverts, which influences the ability to access long-term memory;41 and dopamine for extroverts,42 which fuels “energy, excitement about new ideas, and motivation.”43
Against this backdrop of introverts’ natural tendencies to listen and contemplate before communicating, many law professors, supervising attorneys, and judges expect law students and lawyers to engage in and excel at spontaneous discourse. In the law classroom, law office (often governed by the billable hour), and courtroom, slow thinking is not typically encouraged or understood. Quicker thinkers erroneously might leap to the conclusion that a cautious-thinking law student or lawyer is not that smart. This book aims to upturn that misperception while at the same time empowering quiet advocates to more effectively (and authentically) demonstrate the depth of their thinking.
INTROVERTS ARE GRADUAL DECISION-MAKERS
Although introverts do not need to hem and haw for weeks or months to make a decision, instantaneous decisiveness can be inharmonious with an introvert’s nature. Dr. Laney emphasizes that “introverts require time to form and articulate opinions.”44 Because of their need “to let information percolate,”45 introverts do not delight in immediate decision-making46 or in thinking “on their feet.” Coercing an introvert to make a knee-jerk assessment or a spontaneous choice might yield a completely different result than if the introvert’s normal marinating process ran its course. Thus, the pressure to draw immediate legal conclusions in the law classroom, or to make on-the-spot tactical choices in a negotiation or courtroom, can run contrary to an introvert’s natural preference for measured decision-making. However, with enhanced awareness of this conflict, plus forethought and strategic planning, introverts can be sound legal decision-makers, even in scenarios where spontaneous decisiveness is warranted or expected.
INTROVERTS ARE SELECTIVE WITH WORDS
Introverts are choosy about their outlay of words; they “don’t talk for talk’s sake.”47 Introverts value words expended, and therefore, they reserve speech for ideas that will add to a dialogue meaningfully and that exhibit merit. Cain describes one introvert she encountered as “prefer[ring] to contribute only when he believes he has something insightful to add, or honest-to-God disagrees with someone.”48 Likewise, Mark Tanner, author of a book on introversion in the church, notes that introverts proceed guardedly, and resist sharing thoughts, ideas, and solutions to problems “until [such concepts] are robust enough to stand up to public scrutiny.”49
Because of introverts’ “constant distilling process”50—instinctively cataloguing, sorting, and sifting internally—Cain acknowledges that introverts might not thrive in “speaking extemporaneously.”51 Because introverts think deeply and “value meaning, they want to be precise and select just the right words to express [thoughts and ideas].”52 The Edge, guitarist of U2, reinforces this notion of stewardship of words, or in his case, musical notes:
Notes actually do mean something. They have power. I think of notes as being expensive. You don’t just throw them around. I find the ones that do the best job and that’s what I use. I suppose I’m a minimalist instinctively. I don’t like to be inefficient if I can get away with it … I’m a musician. I’m not a gunslinger. That’s the difference between what I do and what a lot of guitar heroes do.53
The Edge’s respect for the worth of each musical note parallels introverts’ judiciousness with words. Nonetheless, this language economy and conservationism can prompt some extroverts—especially in the legal arena—to incorrectly regard introverts as “hesitant and uncertain of their opinion[s].”54 With enhanced awareness and recognition of the purpose (and benefits) of introverted advocates’ selectiveness in word choice and timing of expression, we can change this potential misperception.
INTROVERTS ARE NATURALLY CAUTIOUS IN GROUP MEETINGS AND BRAINSTORMING SESSIONS
The innate need for unpressured reflective time and a reliance on long-term memory55 can menace introverts in group meetings where spontaneous banter often is expected within the “cut and thrust of debate.”56 The pressure to be “on” in a meeting resembling a verbal volleyball match can be rattling, not to mention antithetical to introverts’ deep thinking and internal decision-making. In group discussions, introverts “usually find it hard to both absorb all the new information and formulate an opinion about it.”57 They might be keen listeners and prolific note-takers, but require a post-meeting contemplative period to assimilate the information gathered, synthesize new concepts with past experiences, develop stand-alone opinions, strategize about appropriate follow-up action, and then craft the best way to phrase a responsive idea to others so that it will be correctly received and implemented.58
The same principle applies to the (dreaded) collective brainstorming session. Dembling affirms that “there’s not an introvert alive who can think clearly in free-for-all brainstorming sessions.”59 Dr. Kahnweiler concurs: “For introverts, this team-heavy approach presents a problem. Not only does being intertwined with others deplete their reserves of people energy, it also takes them away from the physical and intellectual space, where they do their best thinking.”60
Although the power of the billable hour discourages many lawyers from overscheduling meetings, trial and transactional deal teams inevitably must convene for group strategy sessions. Similarly, law students often must work in teams and groups. In such dynamics, the talents of the quiet thinkers are not always optimized. Again, however, with increased awareness of the assets introverts bring to teams and groups throughout law school and practice, and strategic planning by introverts to carve out impactful roles in these sometimes challenging settings, output and effectiveness can be enhanced for all participants.
INTROVERTS CRAVE REDUCED STIMULATION AND QUIET
Cain defines stimulation61 as “the amount of input we have coming in from the outside world.”62 Introverts “can be easily overstimulated by the external world, experiencing the uncomfortable feeling of ‘too much’”63—like nap-inducing bloat after a holiday meal. As Dr. Laney notes, when enough is enough, “the introvert’s mind can shut down, saying, No more input, please. It goes dark.”64 Under these circumstances, an introvert’s productivity can suffer.
When some extrovert friends hear that in the later years of my litigation career I worked remotely from New York City for a Washington, DC-area law firm, researching, writing, and editing briefs 8–10 hours a day in the solitude of my Manhattan apartment, they remark, “How isolating! Why didn’t you go to Starbucks and work?” If I trotted off to Starbucks to draft a motion for summary judgment, my brain would not be able to process legal rules, case law, or persuasive arguments. Instead, the jazz music lilting from the speakers, baristas crooning “half-caf soy latte,” playwrights clacking on their laptops, and rowdy toddlers playing bumper cars with strollers would consume me like a tornado. Dembling shares this sentiment: “I can’t write with music playing. Actually, I can’t write with anything going on around me.”65
Introverts thrive in a quiet, reflective, private workspace, and function well operating solo.66 The quiet “provides energy, increases self-awareness, and spurs creativity.”67 Unless introverts can minimize external stimuli, “their inner thoughts, feelings, and impressions will never bubble up to the surface.”68 With excess environmental distraction, introverts’ ideas can fumble around blindly, with no clear path outward. Of course, after several hours working in isolation, the introvert likely will seek out human contact, but to get the real work done, she disappears back into her office cave. Luckily for introverts, most law firms have rejected the open cubicle/bullpen workspace concept that marketing agencies and other creative companies have embraced, ostensibly to enhance communication and idea sharing. However, introverted lawyers still must battle against the perception of being antisocial or “not a team player” when working quietly behind a closed door or in a remote library carrel to tune out the world and concentrate.
INTROVERTS RESIST INTERRUPTION TO OTHERS AND THEMSELVES
With a proclivity for deep thinking, methodical internal processing, and minimizing distraction, introverts bristle at interruption,69 to others and themselves. In meetings, an introvert might wait for a turn to speak, or until a lull—which might never come. He might try to interject softly (and be overshadowed or glossed over by the more dominant voices),70 or take advantage of a momentary pause to speak about an earlier topic, when the group has long since moved en masse onto another matter.71 Interrupting a loquacious extrovert or a clamorous group demands a bundle of energy, which introverts are loath to expend haphazardly.
Likewise, interrupting introverts “causes them to lose their place, and they have to exert extra energy and concentration to retrieve their thoughts.”72 The intrusion “is like a blanket that silences his or her voice.”73 After an interruption, introverts must ramp up energy to reboot the conversation74 and, thus, such interference with thought flow can be “a big drain on productivity.”75
Consider the telephone. An extrovert might welcome a midday surprise FaceTime chat. To an introvert immersed in a research or writing project, the buzzing of a cellphone is an immediate arrest of concentration and depletion of energy.76 The phone call becomes a command performance, “requiring expending energy for ‘on-the-feet thinking.’”77 To muster the momentum or vigor for a phone call, some introverts feel compelled to stand up and move around during the conversation, to make their voices heard. Introverts are known for screening calls, letting voicemail messages accumulate, and then scheduling time to return a series of phone calls one after the other, curtailing intermittent interruption and energy deficit.
Unfortunately, interruption abounds in legal education and practice. Some exuberant advocates have trouble waiting patiently for an introverted conversation partner to complete a thought before interjecting a point or counterpoint. Many lawyers pepper depositions and trials with objections, strategically disrupting opposing counsel’s flow. Likewise, oral arguments are interspersed with interludes of judges’ questions, which can pose a challenge for introverted advocates. Introverts can engage in strategic planning to minimize, and also manage, interruptions in the law context.
INTROVERTS CHERISH AUTHENTICITY
When introverts confide apprehension toward taxing group dynamics or daunting public speaking scenarios, some (well-meaning) advisors coach: “Fake it till you make it!” “Act as if!” “Pretend you are a Hollywood actor playing a role!” Yet, because introverts revere genuineness,78 they resist these prompts. Cain acknowledges that introverts “have trouble projecting artificial enthusiasm.”79
I always knew I was averse to the “just fake it” approach, but I wasn’t sure why. My resistance resurfaces each time I need to facilitate classroom simulations to model lawyering techniques. Many faculty colleagues share vignettes of classroom success teaching class “in role” as a supervising attorney. Even though I was a supervising attorney in real life for years, I routinely shy away from play-acting the part in the law school classroom; I teach legal writing in the role of a professor, not as a hypothetical law firm partner. I craft assignment instructions as if they were written by real lawyers doling out work to junior associates, but when exploring foundational writing tasks with students, my delivery comes from “Professor Brown,” not from “Attorney Brown.” A quiet law student shed light on, and validated, my internal opposition to teaching “in role.” This student excelled and thrived in all her legal writing projects but dreaded an upcoming simulated (and graded) client interview and a final oral argument assignment—the capstone to our 1L legal writing course. She confided, “I just hate the fakeness of both scenarios. It ruins the experience knowing that the client is just an actor being paid to challenge me. In the argument, it just feels so phony to stand up there in a suit I borrowed from my mom, and say the words ‘May it please the court’ to my Property professor wearing a judge’s robe.”
I never had analyzed the roots of my aversion toward teaching “in role” until this introverted student propounded the perfect summary. She said, “Playing a role in this context just feels inauthentic. It feels bad—physically and mentally.” She wanted to be herself. She cared about the substance of the assignment and toiled to get her message right, but she wanted to convey it only in her own persona and voice. While of course, authenticity and genuineness are not exclusive to introverted individuals, it is helpful for introverts to note, acknowledge, and understand feelings of internal resistance toward playing a “role” or a “character” in the legal arena.
THE DANGER OF SOCIETY’S OBSESSION WITH CONVERSION OF INTROVERTS
Some people erroneously perceive introverts “as shy, anxious misanthropes instead of competent, thoughtful individuals.”80 They assume introverts need to be fixed. Well-intentioned but misguided mentors prod introverts: “Smile!” “Cheer up!” “Speak up!” “Chime in!” “Get involved!” “Have an opinion!” “Be assertive!” “Participate!” “Get out there!” “Be social!” “Be approachable!” “Just do it!” Unfortunately, as Dembling affirms, “Many introverts have internalized society’s message that their way of being is wrong and that extroversion is better.”81 They are pushed to change who they fundamentally are.82 Dr. Kahnweiler reiterates, “[I]ntroverts are indeed continually asked to adapt to an extrovert-centric workplace that rewards being out there and on stage.”83 Many introverts try for years (myself, for nearly two decades) to adopt extrovert standards84 of socializing, working, and striving for success. They wonder why they are exhausted, frustrated, stressed, anxious, or depressed.
Shame is a dangerous by-product of the push toward introversion conversion. As children, many introverts are made to feel ashamed for simply being their quiet selves in our loud American culture,85 “receiving the message overtly and covertly that something is wrong with them.”86 Notably, Carl Jung warned of the harm in “push[ing] a child outside of the natural range of his or her temperament.”87
Speaking from personal experience, plus observation of and open conversations with my law students, children disparaged by authority figures for exhibiting introvert traits and habits “can become shy, inhibited, or afraid.”88 Some quiet law students with a crushing fear of public speaking have verified this causal connection after mining their childhood experiences and recalling specific instances of self-silencing after repeated interactions with critical authority figures such as coaches, teachers, or dominant family members. Reaching back to my own educational journey as an introverted child (as part of my self-evaluation along the seven-step journey toward finding my authentic lawyer voice), I vividly remembered a popular middle-school teacher publicly mocking me twice: after I mustered the courage to verbalize outward excitement over the results of a science experiment, and upon the joyous discovery that the largest Secret Santa gift under the classroom tree miraculously was for me. Later, in high school and college, when influential, formative figures admonished and withdrew from me when I marshaled the nerve to express blossoming political thoughts about election candidates and public policy issues that differed from their beliefs, such as the death penalty or abortion, I burned with shame, and lost the nascent trust germinating in my young voice. When I got to law school, the shame entrenched. Overwhelmed by a cacophony of classmates bandying about constitutional levels of scrutiny, I retreated off-grid into my textbooks. When cold-called in class, I flash-blushed, and hives curled my neck like vines. Researching, writing, and quietly thinking about the law offered solace.
Shame is a particularly important emotion for determined introverts to note and process because it “is related to being. We feel shame when we think we are unworthy or innately flawed.”89 Rather than a fleeting sensation of temporary embarrassment because a person cannot do something correctly or has committed an erroneous act (an external representation), shame derives from a belief of being an inherently defective person (an internal entrenchment). Using a religious theme, it is the contrast between committing a sin versus being a punishable sinner. Or, committing a crime versus being a criminal.
Imbedded childhood shame can rear its monstrous head many years later in adult social and professional circumstances, holding us back from asserting ourselves, taking a stand, expressing an opinion, or making a decision. One outstanding yet nervous law student shared his utter confusion at a newly triggered extraordinary fear of public speaking in the law classroom. He marveled at how he had navigated college with no anxiety or performance issues whatsoever. Through surveying his personal history, he realized that the tenor of judgment and competition in the law classroom had reignited childhood shame linked to harsh criticism by coaches he worked with as an accomplished child athlete.
Dr. Peter Breggin, who writes about the “legacy emotions” of guilt, shame, and anxiety, explains that some individuals “learned in childhood to feel shameful at the very thought of standing up to authority.”90 Perhaps parents, teachers, coaches, religious advisors, babysitters, or other authority figures rebuked an introverted child for stating an opinion that differed from theirs, after the child carefully and methodically molded that belief and rallied the energy and courage to express it. After repeated similar censorship experiences, the introverted child began to doubt his viewpoints and decision-making ability. Naturally, developing a personal perspective or making an individualized choice became scary, associated with a risk of withdrawal of love or approval. Logically, to sidestep shame, adults with such history might unconsciously resist sharing thoughts and observations with others,91 especially in the legal arena, where thought-sharing quickly can transform into heated debate and (perceived) judgment.
Emotions like shame and anxiety pose barriers to “adult self-assertiveness even when it is rational, ethical, or needed for self-defense and the promotion of our higher ideals.”92 In the legal context, law students and lawyers are expected to assert strong opinions about societal issues. To do so comfortably and genuinely, introverted advocates first might need to peel back a layer of shame or anxiety painted by a lifetime of being told to change. The great news is: childhood messages that underscore the notion that introverts need to be fixed or should harbor shame for being themselves can be overwritten. The second half of this book offers one tangible plan for quiet law students and attorneys to embrace their authentic personas and unveil their mighty lawyer voices.
SHYNESS
Introversion, which epitomizes the way many of us expend and rekindle energy, and how we process and share ideas, is different from shyness, defined as “an extreme self-consciousness when one is around people.”93 Shyness stems from a dread of “rejection, ridicule, or embarrassment”94—a fear of judgment.95 Of course, judgment permeates the legal world: through competition for law school grades, law review and moot court accolades, job placement, bonuses in law practice, partnership decisions, etc. We even refer to a case outcome as a judgment in one litigant’s favor. Although some people mistakenly interchange the terminology of introversion and shyness, some individuals might be both introverted and shy, but not all introverts are shy. Non-shy introverts socially engage, and many can do so masterfully, investing in each interpersonal interaction with a “pace of high social energy.”96 Eventually, they simply need solitude to decompress. As marriage and family therapist Steve Flowers, author of a transformative book, The Mindful Path Through Shyness, explains, “Introverts prefer solitary rather than social activities because that’s satisfying for them; people who feel shy, on the other hand, choose solitary activities out of fear or anxiety.”97
When we think of shy children, we envision cautious tots clinging to their parents’ legs. When children don’t respond readily to adult questions, parents step in and quip, “Oh, she’s just shy.” When we use the verb “shy,” as in “to shy away from,” we imply avoidance, evasion, circumvention. In some cultures, shyness connotes positive characteristics, such as modesty, respect for others, and humility. In American society, shyness is undesirable, especially when linked to perceived unsociable behavior or to a more intense fear of social interaction.
Distinct from introversion, some individuals dodge social interaction not because they have reached their mixing-and-mingling limit and crave a battery recharge, but because they dread sensing initial or lingering judgment, feeling lesser than the other person, or being perceived as weak, perhaps nerdy, unintelligent, unattractive, awkward, weird, or unlikeable. Flowers explains that some people experience “problematic shyness,” marked by “feelings of being unsafe in interpersonal relationships.”98 Flowers, Dr. Barbara G. Markway, and Dr. Gregory P. Markway use the term “painfully shy.”99 Flowers reiterates, “It’s painful to feel anxious and unsafe in the world, and to think there’s something wrong with you.”100
Painfully shy individuals grapple with feeling evaluated, judged, critiqued, shamed, and rejected in their everyday interfaces with other human beings—some on a merely unpleasant level and others on a potentially debilitating level.101 This adult pattern can originate in childhood through messages conveyed by parents, caretakers, teachers, coaches, siblings, or other influential figures. Many individuals “learn to be shy because of criticism, shaming, and rejection.”102 These messages are reinforced both externally and internally, and become ingrained in the way shy individuals interact with others. Shy folks hear a forceful and prolific internal critical voice that constantly castigates them for everyday actions, speech, and behavior.103 Not only is the shy person’s mental script harsh, but shyness can spark unpleasant physical responses like a rapid heartbeat, shortness of breath, facial redness, perspiration, and trembling.104
Like the root of some introverts’ self-censorship, shyness stems from feelings of shame,105 invoked by historical criticism or rebuke from others. Shame makes an individual feel unworthy,106 and “powerless or insignificant.”107 Because shame obviously does not feel good, the more we felt shame as children, the harder we strive as adults to avoid any form of that emotion. Consciously or subconsciously, we flee situations that potentially might trigger shameful feelings, such as social interaction or public speaking scenarios that inevitably invite judgment. Shy persons “are afraid of the consequences of being more open, forthright, or assertive.”108 To protect oneself from circumstances that summon knee-jerk habits of “self-blaming and self-shaming,” these individuals isolate, relentlessly “building the walls of the prison that is shyness.”109
The distinction between introversion and shyness is important for quiet law students and lawyers to know. The non-shy introvert’s developmental arc toward increasing impact as an advocate will involve: (1) realizing the pivotal role that introverts can and should play in the legal profession (described further in Chapter 3); (2) increasing awareness of and honing natural proficiencies like active listening, deep analysis, thoughtful writing, etc.; and (3) making conscious mental and physical adjustments (described in the second half of this book) when anticipating and participating in interpersonal exchanges, to amplify one’s authentic voice. However, shy and socially anxious law students and lawyers likely first will need to go deeper, to unearth root causes of fear of judgment, clear out the mental detritus from the past that is no longer relevant in our law-related lives, and then jump into the foregoing steps.
SOCIAL ANXIETY DISORDER AND SOCIAL PHOBIA
Anxiety is ubiquitous in American society, which is no shock considering our daily news injection of global and domestic conflict, plus the rollercoaster of personal pressures and responsibilities we all ride daily. The competitive legal world is no stranger to anxiety (or depression). As noted in this book’s introduction, studies show that matriculating law students exhibit a psychological profile reflective of the general population.110 Yet, after graduation, 20 to 40 percent indicate “a psychological dysfunction.”111 Research further reveals that 26 percent of lawyers who pursue counseling reference anxiety and depression, and 19 percent of lawyers struggle with “statistically significant elevated levels of depression.”112 Remarkably, experts indicate that “anxiety is the most common emotional problem in our society, if not the entire world. Yet, only twenty-five percent of people with anxiety seek professional guidance, and only a fraction [of these] receive effective help.”113
Social anxiety disorder is a variation of shyness, in clinical form.114 Shyness and social anxiety “are among the most debilitating forms of anxiety.”115 Flowers provides the American Psychiatric Association’s definition of social anxiety disorder:
Social anxiety disorder, also called social phobia, is an intense fear or even terror of humiliation or embarrassment in relation to groups of people. It’s very difficult to overcome and can be very disabling. For this reason, social phobia is substantially different from shyness and is classified as a mental health disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.116
Like shyness (and the roots of self-censorship by introverts), social anxiety propagates from negative, self-critical, and self-shaming words, phrases, and messages that individuals accepted as truths earlier in life, and which they replay over and over in their minds throughout adulthood.117 Socially anxious individuals fear “being negatively judged by others and humiliated. They may have panic attacks or severe anxiety when they are in or anticipate being in social situations.”118 Social anxiety that rises to the level of detrimentally affecting an individual’s personal and professional engagements qualifies as social phobia or social anxiety disorder.119
Experts estimate that social phobia affects up to 13 percent of the American population,120 which means there is a strong likelihood that socially phobic individuals sit in every law school classroom and law office. However, this condition is rarely if ever discussed in the law context, in which immediate interpersonal interaction in the classroom, courtroom, or conference room is expected. Happily, social anxiety disorder is treatable,121 through reframing mental and physical habits and behaviors. Social anxiety is “not a fixed state. It is fluid. [An individual] can change its shape and its quantity.”122
HOW INTROVERSION, SHYNESS, AND SOCIAL ANXIETY CAN MANIFEST INTO PUBLIC SPEAKING ANXIETY IN THE LEGAL CONTEXT
In American legal education, public speaking is mandatory in the Socratic classroom and in oral argument assignments. In law practice, litigators engage in public debate through depositions, courtroom arguments, trials, and settlement negotiations. Transactional attorneys deliver client presentations and negotiate orally. Some introverted, shy, and socially anxious individuals struggle in the legal public speaking arena, no matter how large or how small the audience, and no matter how high-stakes or how low-stakes the engagement. Even in one-on-one encounters or in small-group settings around a conference table, introverts can experience anxiety toward public speaking because of their tendency toward methodical internal thinking, their habit of pausing and reflecting, the time they need to process information before responding, and a reluctance to speak prior to vetting ideas. In larger settings, such as in an auditorium or courtroom, introverts can become overstimulated by crowd noise, bright lights, technology overload, and commotion. Likewise, for shy and socially anxious law students and lawyers, fear of judgment and criticism invoked by a one-on-one encounter or a small or large group audience can trigger past shame feelings that are capable of derailing even the most prepared speaker. The good news is, after we understand the triggers of public speaking anxiety, we can adopt mental and physical strategies to optimize our quiet strengths and become truly impactful orators.
CULTURAL INTROVERSION
The phenomenon of “cultural introversion” can occur in English as a Second Language (ESL) students studying law in the United States or non-native-English-speakers pursuing law courses taught in English in non-U.S. law schools. Students who are confident, talkative extroverts in their native environments and languages can self-censor into quietude, embarrassed by, or worse, ashamed of accents or a shaky command of English. These students fear being perceived by professors and classmates as less intelligent than their peers. A different form of cultural introversion can occur in international students studying in American law classrooms who hail from countries in which disagreeing with or engaging in debate with a professor is considered rude or disrespectful. Unless teachers provide adequate context for, and model, the Socratic dialogue first, the expectation to speak extemporaneously in the American classroom, and to challenge statements made by professors and classmates, can trigger stress and anxiety in some of these students.
Participants in my public speaking anxiety workshops have offered examples of cultural introversion. For three consecutive years, 2012–2014, in anticipation of the spring oral argument competition at New York Law School, where I taught legal writing, I conducted a five-part Overcoming Public Speaking Anxiety (OPSA) workshop series, with funding from the New York State Bar Association (in the latter two years). The workshop participants included mostly women, many minorities, and several students with upbringings—either cultural or religious—that reinforced quiet personas. One participant shared her version of cultural introversion. She moved to the United States from Germany when she was in junior high school; learning English, she spoke with a heavy accent. Her classmates teased her to the point that she self-censored. Even though her adult voice evinced not a trace of an accent, her cultural introversion lingered in the law school classroom, triggering fear toward the Socratic Method and the 1L oral argument assignment.
More recently, I taught a workshop on English legal writing to law students in southern Italy. My own stereotype of and enamoredness with the boisterous Italian persona intact, I did not anticipate encountering introversion in this particular classroom. For the final assignment in our curriculum on persuasion, I asked my students to prepare and perform a five-minute oral argument on a topic of their choice. Given my personal history and research focus on introversion and interpersonal anxiety, and because the course was fast-tracked into a short, four-week schedule with limited time for real, oral advocacy training, I also offered an alternative: students could participate in a small-group workshop on public speaking anxiety in the legal arena if the oral argument assignment presented personal challenges. Four students confided that they felt substantial apprehension toward the oral argument assignment. One of the four (a male student) opted not to participate in the workshop and performed the oral argument anyway. Three female students participated in the workshop (one of whom additionally performed the oral argument). Two of the female students shared that their anxiety toward public speaking stemmed from fear of judgment by their classmates about their substantive command of legal topics. The third female student—one of the top writers in the class—disclosed that her fear sprang not from anticipated public perception of her substantive knowledge, but from embarrassment about her Italian accent and stilted grammar when she spoke English. Interestingly, several students I met during my teaching in Italy confided that they experienced marked anxiety toward the Italian model of oral exams required in the majority of their classes, but reported that—to their knowledge—no programs yet existed to address the psychological aspect of this type of student stress.
Building on the foregoing foundation of the distinctions among introverted, shy, and socially anxious individuals, let’s now look at the challenges facing these law students and lawyers in the legal context. Then we’ll examine how quiet individuals—with increased self-awareness and a holistic approach, and buoyed by compassionate and motivating professors and law office mentors—can transform the legal profession.