What Type of Law Should I Practice Quiz
How the Scales are Structured
Who Usually Takes This Test?
See How You Compare
Below is a preview of how scores are typically distributed across each scale.
Example Questions From the Test
- I would prefer to hand the conflict to someone who enjoys adversarial exchanges
- I would look first for areas of agreement that could narrow the conflict
- I would calmly identify the weakest claims and plan a proportionate response
- I would feel motivated to master the record and build a persuasive counterargument
- Advising an organization through several stages of growth
- Representing someone in a focused dispute with limited personal contact
- Guiding a person through negotiation, court requirements, and a major family transition
- Helping individuals resolve personal disagreements primarily through mediation
- I would rather work on matters where personal history rarely shapes legal decisions
- I could listen respectfully, but I would prefer another professional to handle most emotional support
- I would help identify which experiences matter legally while maintaining clear boundaries
- I could manage it when balanced with research, drafting, or courtroom work
What Type of Law Should I Practice Quiz - Description and methodology of the test
People considering law school, a first legal role, or a career change can use this assessment to compare practice environments with their interests and preferred ways of working. The What Type of Law Should I Practice Quiz turns reactions to clients, conflict, drafting, evidence, and public impact into a comparative profile. Someone taking a what type of lawyer should I be quiz can explore professional fit.
What This Assessment Explores
The questions examine legal preferences rather than doctrine: client contact, emotional boundaries, negotiation, contested facts, drafting, pressure, institutional rules, and community impact. This is a what kind of law should I practice quiz:
- Corporate and Transactional Law (0-12) measures deals, organizational advice, and risk allocation; Limited pull 0-4; Selective interest 5-8; Strong affinity 9-12.
- Criminal Law (0-12) measures evidence, procedure, consequential advocacy, and justice-system work; Limited pull 0-4; Selective interest 5-8; Strong affinity 9-12.
- Family Law (0-12) measures personal conflict, negotiation, and changing family arrangements; Limited pull 0-4; Selective interest 5-8; Strong affinity 9-12.
- Litigation and Dispute Resolution (0-12) measures contested facts, argument, and pressure advocacy; Limited pull 0-4; Selective interest 5-8; Strong affinity 9-12.
- Public Interest and Government Law (0-12) measures institutions, regulation, policy implementation, and community impact; Limited pull 0-4; Selective interest 5-8; Strong affinity 9-12.
Methodology and Scientific Basis
Each item presents a workplace or client scenario with four response choices. The alternatives contrast negotiation with advocacy, detailed drafting with policy work, emotional proximity with professional distance, and immediate disputes with gradual institutional change. This is preference-based self-report, not a doctrine test.
Five profile scores are reported independently. They indicate affinity rather than assigning a role: the highest score is strongest, while scores within one point indicate a blended path. The comparison supports a what area of law should I practice quiz.
The evidence is conceptually consistent with the Legal Career Compatibility Project (Gollob, 2018), but this questionnaire is not its adaptation. Holland’s model links preferences with work environments; Erlanger and colleagues’ 1996 study adds context on ideals and job conditions in legal careers.
Results may shift with current circumstances, self-awareness, and exposure to legal work because this is a comparative self-report profile. This test functions as a what kind of lawyer should I be quiz and offers a starting point for broader career research.
- Gollob, Justin. “An Honest Conversation: An In-Class Tool to Help Pre-Law Students Determine Their Compatibility with Law School and a Legal Career.” PS: Political Science & Politics, vol. 51, no. 1, 2018, pp. 194-196. 10.1017/S1049096517001937
- Erlanger, Howard S., Charles R. Epp, Mia Cahill, and Kathleen M. Haines. “Law Student Idealism and Job Choice: Some New Data on an Old Question.” Law & Society Review, vol. 30, no. 4, 1996, pp. 851-864. 10.2307/3054120
- Holland, John L. Making Vocational Choices: A Theory of Vocational Personalities and Work Environments. 3rd ed., Psychological Assessment Resources, 1997.
Updated: