Research into practice
How do readers understand an argument? What makes a skill stick? Where does AI help, and where does human judgment matter most?
Questions like these shape everything we build at Write.law, from legal writing workshops to practical AI training.
Explore the ideasMake the
point clear.
Give readers an idea they can understand, remember, and use.
This is a partial, selected collection of the research, theories, and insights our team continually explores. It sits within a much broader body of published research, proprietary work, and experience with legal teams that informs our programs.
Ideas that earn their place
A writing choice should help the reader. An AI workflow should help the lawyer. A training exercise should help the skill transfer to real work.
We connect ideas from cognitive science, language, persuasion, learning, and human–AI collaboration to the decisions legal professionals make every day. Then we turn those ideas into concrete techniques, worked examples, and opportunities to practice.
Ask what research and experience reveal about the task.
Connect it to a brief, a client email, a prompt, or a review.
Apply it, get feedback, and refine the work.
Inside Write.law
Our own work helps us see how legal readers respond to the choices writers make. Here are four findings we can share.
Selected findings from Write.law’s proprietary research. The underlying data and white papers remain confidential.
Nearly 2×
In our internal comparisons, legal readers rated arguments nearly twice as persuasive when key points were fully explained at the outset in a way that showed the reasoning.
The teaching takeaway: give readers the important facts and the logic up front. Help them see why the point follows.
In our internal work, legal readers retained fewer ideas per sentence than other readers, often selecting a single idea to carry forward.
Make the main takeaway unmistakable. Give competing ideas room.
Our findings show greater persuasion when writers use fewer subjective, directive advocacy phrases, such as “the court must” or “egregiously erred.”
Replace forceful labels with facts and an explanation the reader can evaluate.
In our work, clearer relationships among high-level ideas supported better retention and persuasion.
Use openings, headings, and transitions to show how the pieces fit.
A broad view of better work
Selected studies, reviews, and frameworks across the skills we teach. Each connects a finding or idea to a practical training application.
Try “feedback,” “memory,” “AI,” or a broader topic.
The summaries describe the linked work; “In practice” connects it to our teaching. Together, these ideas inform how we design training for legal professionals.
From our co-founder
Joe Regalia writes about how lawyers communicate, collaborate, and use AI. Explore a few of the ideas behind our approach to modern legal work.
Explore Write.law’s practical guide to planning, drafting, reviewing, and working with AI.
Built for the work you do
Build clearer writing, stronger judgment, and practical AI skills with training designed for legal teams.
Learning on your own? Explore our courses