❗Emotion Encoded ❗: So ⁉People Wouldn't Follow Only the Lawyers Advice But an AI Tool Contradicts That Advice? ⁉

At Emotion Encoded, our research dives into the fascinating and often contradictory ways people interact with artificial intelligence. We recently posed a thought experiment: "If an AI legal assistant suggests a strategy that conflicts with your lawyer's advice, how would you respond?" The answers from our survey of 41 participants revealed a surprising truth about trust in the legal field.

A professional's advice has traditionally been a definitive guide for clients. You hire a lawyer, an expert, to tell you the best path forward. Given this, you might expect people to simply defer to their counsel. But our data shows a powerful shift in perspective.

The majority of respondents chose to actively engage with the AI’s contradictory advice rather than ignore it:

• **51.2%** said they would **"Discuss both options before deciding."**
• **34.1%** opted to **"Seek a second opinion."**

Only a small fraction, **9.8%**, chose to follow only the lawyer's advice. This is a clear indicator that people do not view the AI's suggestion as a mistake to be dismissed. Instead, it is seen as a new piece of information, a valid alternative to be considered and debated.

This new dynamic suggests that the AI assistant acts as a catalyst, empowering the client to be a more active participant in their legal strategy. It transforms the client-lawyer relationship from a one where a client simply accepts advice, to an active collaboration. The AI is not a replacement for the lawyer, but a tool that enables the client to critically evaluate options and take greater ownership of their decisions.