Legal Actor Contributions Survey (LACS)
A brief qualitative measure to capture and describe judicial therapeutic behaviour in courtroom proceedings.
Instructions: Check circle item as it occurs, and rate the estimated frequency of occurrence when indicated.
1. Introductions
Initial address by the judge to the defendant in court
Please circle the elements that occur in the court room interaction:
1.a Establishes context: The judge explains to the defendant how the court works and the aims of the hearing.
1.b The judge addresses the defendant personally
1.c The judge makes eye contact
1.d The judge is non-intimidating, speaks calmly, with a neutral tone.
1.e Emotional tone (select number closest to the tone on the continuum below)
1 2 3 4 5
warm --- positive but firm ---- neutral ----------- cold ------------ hostile
1.f Body language (circle one option out of each pair below):
i. open / closed
ii. dominant / encouraging
2. Discussion about Problem
Please circle the elements that occur in the court room interaction:
2.a The judge asks about the nature, context and reasoning behind the defendant’s crimes.
2.b The judge asks the defendant what they think the problem and their solution might be.
Including enquiring about;
Adverse or traumatic life events.
Substance misuse, abuse or dependence
Mental health issues
Family and cultural norms
Other social or economic issues
2.c The judge includes the defendant’s words into statements and questions (while enhancing responsibility)
3. Summary or Sentencing Remarks
Please circle the elements that occur in the court room interaction:
3.a The judge creates a collaborative definition of the problem with the defendant
3.b The judge incorporates the defendant and their context into sentencing
3.c Location of the problem (please circle one)
The judge describes the defendant as their behaviour
OR The judge separates the behaviour from the defendant
3.d The location of responsibility to act (agency and accountability) in judicial speech (please circle one)
The judge describes the defendant as responsible for their actions
OR The judge describes the defendant as not responsible for their actions
3.e The judge explains the reasons for sentencing
3.f The judge makes reference to the emotions and wishes of defendant in sentencing remarks
3.g The judge includes acknowledgement of the victim’s experience in sentencing remarks
3.h The judge guides conversations within the courtroom with participants and themselves that have an overt agenda for change
3.i The judge builds a coherent story or narrative of the context of the crime
3.j Resources: (please make a mark on the line which corresponds to your overall impression of the judicial discussion)
<---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Please circle the elements that occur in the court room interaction:
No mention of resources and support / Mentions resources and support / Mentions multidisciplinary practice resources and supports
4. Judicial Communication Skills
4.a Questions
Open ____________________________________________________________________Closed
% of time
4.b Listening
Active____________________________________________________________________Passive
% of time
Active listening: does the judge make use of the following techniques?
(please check the circle if these elements are present):
4.c Paraphrasing
4.d Asks clarifying questions
4.e Validation / minimal encouragers
Participation: does the judge make use of the following techniques?
4.f Inviting defendant to participate
4.g Turn taking in discussion
4.h Adaptation of communication style to defendant (cognitive ability, language, communication disorders)
4.i Cultural referencing appropriate to client
4.j Offering the defendant relevant and supportive choices
5. Judicial positioning / trust / rapport
5.a Observed emotional tone of the judge overall (please circle one):
1 2 3 4 5
warm----positive but firm----------neutral ---------cold ------------ hostile
5.b Body language overall (please circle one):
1 2 3 4 5
open ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------closed
5.c 1 2 3 4 5
encouraging ------------------------------------------------------------------- dominant
5.d Judicial positioning overall (please circle one):
1 2 3 4 5
Positioned as an ally ----------neutral-------------------------------adversarial
Please circle the elements that occur in the court room interaction:
5.e Did the judge and defendant appear to honestly agree on the goals of the hearing
5.f Did the judge and defendant appear to honestly agree on the tasks to be completed during the hearing
Judicial Body language: the body language displayed by the judge during the hearing
Please circle the elements that occur in the court room interaction:
5.g Attentive and open (looking at the defendant, arms uncrossed, leaning in, head tilting, slow nodding, furrowed brow, interest noises eg. ‘hmmm hmmm’)
5.h Dominant (stern or disapproving expression, body positioned to take up a lot of space, display of expensive items, interrupting, preening or inspecting nails, stroking chin, aggressive gestures, rolling eyes)
5.i Bored or tired (mostly looking away from the defendant, drumming fingers, tapping toes, tapping other objects, yawning, sagging posture)
5.j Closed posture (arms crossed, head tilted down and away)
5.k Evidence of reciprocity in the interaction between the judge and the defendant
(mirroring in body posture, emotional tone, facial expressions)
Copyright 2020:
This tool is made publicly available with consent for use for court research and magistrate development, as well as the purposes described in the articles below. Making unauthorized adaptations or changes to this Survey without the author's consent is expressly forbidden.
Please contact the author re possible inclusion in any court research studies.
References for the LACS:
Rhondda Waterworth 'Measuring Legal Actor Contributions in Court: Judges’ Roles, Therapeutic Alliance and Therapeutic Change' (2019) 28(4) Journal of Judicial Administration.
Rhondda Waterworth (2018) ‘The Case for Measuring Legal Actor Contributions in Court Proceedings’, Psychiatry, Psychology and Law.
‘Development of a Measurement Tool for Courtroom Legal Actor Contributions: a Delphi Study Consulting the Experts’ (2020) (in consideration for publication currently)
'What Can Judges Do to Facilitate Change: Measuring Legal Actor Contributions in Court from a Therapeutic Perspective' Presentation of research at the International Academy of Law and Mental Health conference in Rome, July 2019 (http://ialmh.org/rome-2019-2/)
Keywords:
Magistrate, legal actor therapeutic contributions, measurement tools for court craft, therapeutic change skills, therapeutic jurisprudence (TJ), procedural justice, legitimacy of justice, social justice outcomes, courts, problem solving court, drug court, mental health court, court outcomes research, recidivism, mainstreaming TJ, psychology, counsellor, therapy, therapist, Systemic Family Therapy, Attachment-Informed trauma therapy, EMDR, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), Narrative Therapy, Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (CBT), Brief Therapy, talking therapy, depression, anxiety, PTSD, trauma, insomnia, psychological assessment.
