The judgment (J) and perception (P) preference index describes the way an individual deals with the outer world.⁽¹⁵⁹⁾ People preferring judgment prefer using thinking or feeling when dealing with the outer world. People preferring perception would rather use sensing or intuition for their dealings with the outer world.⁽¹⁶⁰⁾ 

Individuals preferring judgment (either thinking or feeling) tend to live in a planned, orderly way. They have a strong desire to want to regulate and control life. People who prefer judgment like to make decisions. They like to have things come to a closure and then move on to the next project. However, a preference for judgment does not mean that the person is judgmental, merely that he or she likes a structured and organized life where things are settled. 

Persons preferring perception when dealing with the outer world like to live in a flexible and spontaneous way. They like to gather information and seek to understand rather than to control. Persons preferring perception tend to stay open to experiences, and enjoy and trust their ability to adapt. 

One hundred and four students (67.5%) preferred judgment and fifty-four students (32.5%) preferred perception.⁽¹⁶¹⁾ A larger percentage of females (78.1%) than males (60.0%) preferred judgment over perception. The difference was statistically significant (p=.0179). A larger percentage of whites (67.9%) than students of color (64.7%) preferred judgment over perception. However, the difference was not statistically significant (p=.7919). 

Students preferring judgment had higher mean FSGPA (2.568) than students preferring perception (2.523).⁽¹⁶²⁾ However, this difference was not statistically significant (p=.5903). The students' JP continuous scores decreased as their first semester grades increased.⁽¹⁶³⁾ That is, the more the student preferred judgment, the better the student performed. However, the difference was not statistically significant (p=.112).⁽¹⁶⁴⁾ 

The judging-perception distinction is important in determining whether law students prefer structured learning environments or spontaneous learning environments.⁽¹⁶⁵⁾ Law schools are highly structured environments. They require a student to make outlines, brief cases, read a certain number of pages, and write a certain number of papers. Judging law students prefer the kind of highly structured learning environment present in law schools. Judging law students take satisfaction in accomplishing the tasks of law schools and generally like law schools because of their "system, order, defined tasks and structured assignments."⁽¹⁶⁶⁾ Judging law students are more likely to have and follow a schedule. In fact, more than any other student, judging law students are likely to like the work of law schools.⁽¹⁶⁷⁾ Judging law students learn more through fulfilling their duty than through curiosity and may sometimes encounter difficulty in their legal analyses because "they have probably decided prematurely, on the basis of insufficient information, either that they are right or that there is nothing more to be done."⁽¹⁶⁸⁾ 

Law faculty need to provide judging law students with structure and organization, since they like to "know what they are accountable for, and . . . be held to it."⁽¹⁶⁹⁾ However, since many legal problems require "spontaneity, [and] flexibility in the face of sudden changes," judging law students require exercises which get them to operate without structure.⁽¹⁷⁰⁾ Law faculty need to help judging law students avoid fulfilling their need for closure when the problem really calls for a broader curiosity.⁽¹⁷¹⁾ 

Since perceptive students prefer open and spontaneous learning environments,⁽¹⁷²⁾  they may feel imprisoned in the highly structured environment of law school. Because perceptive law students like courses that are free-wheeling, flexible, and adapted to their interests as they arise, they are likely to find much of law school stagnant and boring.⁽¹⁷³⁾ Perceptive law students need to be encouraged to organize and plan.⁽¹⁷⁴⁾ They need to be encouraged not to procrastinate.⁽¹⁷⁵⁾ Unlike judging law students, perceptive law students are likely to learn more through curiosity about the legal system than through duty to the studying process.⁽¹⁷⁶⁾ In fact, even 

during examinations, perceptive law students are open to other possibilities even though their judging attitude "might stand them in better stead."⁽¹⁷⁷⁾ Perceptive law students need "practice in recognizing when it is time to be open, curious and perceptive; and when it is time to stop looking and decide to act." ⁽¹⁷⁸⁾Law faculty should be alert to occasions where seeking one more bit of information prevents a perceptive law student from making a legal connection that could have been made had the student been more decisive.⁽¹⁷⁹⁾ 

However, whether a law student prefers a structured learning environment seems to make no statistical difference in performance. That is, it made little statistical difference whether law students prefer a "highly structured environment" or an "open and spontaneous environment."  TABLES OMITTED

159. FN159. Myers & McCaulley, supra note 57, at 13-14. 

160. FN160. Id. 

161. FN161. With 60% of the general population, this sample of first year law students prefer judgment more. Id. at 45. This sample of first year law students preferred judgment more than law students from a previous study, less than lawyers in one study and more than lawyers in another study, and less than judges. Natter, supra note 87, at 56 (reporting data gathered by Paul Miller in 1965 and 1967 in which 57% of 2248 law students from five different schools were judges); Myers & McCaulley, supra note 57, at 248 (reporting that 62.43% of 519 lawyers preferred judgment, that 53.87% of 271 lawyers preferred judgment, and that 74.22% of 128 judges preferred judgment); Richard, supra note 88, at 76 (reporting 63% of lawyers as judging, with 61% of male lawyers and 67% of female lawyers as judges). 

As to the level of preference, a slightly smaller percentage of judgment types (57.7%) than perception types (56.0%) had a clear or very clear preference (p.789). Myers & McCaulley, supra note 57, at 59 (reporting level of preference for 32,671 individuals from the MBTI data bank, with 56.2% preferring judgment having a clear or very clear preference and 48.2% preferring perception having a clear or very clear preference). 

162. FN162. In another study, judging types achieved slightly higher grades than perceptive types, while scoring lower on all other academic measures. McCaulley & Natter, supra note 63, at 141. 

163. FN163. Continuous Scores are a linear transformation of preference scores. On the JP continuous scale, between 33 to 99 is a preference for Judgment and the lower the score the stronger the preference. Between 101 to 167 is a preference for perception and the higher the score the stronger the preference for perception. A score of 100 is a median score showing no preference for either judgment or perception. On JP continuous score, the mean score was 89.62 (a mean preference for judgment); males had a mean score of 94.56 (a mean preference for judgment); females had a mean score of 82.69 (a mean preference for judgment); whites had a mean score of 89.74 (a mean preference for judgment); and, students of color had a mean score of 88.71 (a mean preference for judgment). Appendix, Table E3. 

164. FN164. Similarly, males (p=.065) and whites (p=.013) had the same association. Females (p=.392) and students of color (p=.049) continuous scores increased as the FSGPA increased. Appendix, Table E3. 

165. FN165. Jensen, supra note 51, at 185. 

166. FN166. McCaulley & Natter, supra note 63, at 162. 

167. FN167. Id. at 163. 

168. FN168. Id. at 162. 

169. FN169. Id. at 163. 

170. FN170. Id. 

171. FN171. Id. 

172. FN172. Jensen, supra note 51, at 186 

173. FN173. McCaulley & Natter, supra note 63, at 164. 

174. FN174. Id. 

175. FN175. Id. 

176. FN176. Id. 

177. FN177. Id. at 165. 

178. FN178. Id. 

179. FN179. Id.