« Shake Shack to Open New Supreme Court Location | Main | Sidd Finch at 25 »

Sunday, April 01, 2012

The Most Important Legal Scholarship Debate Resolved

It's a pleasure being back at Prawfsblawg. Thanks to Danny and the team for the visit this month. I've actually been really excited about this for a while.

For my first post, I'd really like to just get right down to it and resolve the biggest debate in legal scholarship. Yes, that's right: colons or no colons. For the few of you who have never sweat over this important question, I give you an example. "Peacocks and Kuakas: Will the Toughest Bird Please Stand Up?" or "Strong Birds in a Fight" Which title introduces an article in a way that is catchy, interesting, and more appropriate for legal scholarship? Are colons still an important part of law review titles or are they a relic of the past? Have we moved to shorter law review article titles or is a colon still an integral part of a title that says just what we want it to say?

Well, I'm pleased to report that I have the answer to this question. With a little help from some students at the BYU Law Review and my assistant, we were able to analyze submissions in a one month peak submission period (February 2012) to determine how many article titles had a colon in them and how many did not. The results of course are statistically significant and representative of all other law reviews in the country this year.* We found that . . . colons are still in vogue though just barely winning out over non-coloned titles (348 v. 331). Check out the stats:

Glad to resolve a persistent unresolved issue on most of our minds. Happy April Fools
everyone!* Looking forward to my month at Prawfsblawg.

Posted by Shima Baradaran Baughman on April 1, 2012 at 11:43 AM in Blogging | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Most Important Legal Scholarship Debate Resolved:


Post a comment