Law as a User: Design, Affordance, and the Technological Mediation of Norms

Technology law scholars have recently started to consider the theories of affordance and technological mediation, imported from the fields of psychology, human-computer interaction (HCI), and science and technology studies (STS). These theories have been used both as a means of explaining how the la...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Laurence Diver
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Edinburgh 2018-08-01
Series:SCRIPTed: A Journal of Law, Technology & Society
Subjects:
Online Access:https://script-ed.org/?p=3534
id doaj-e4593da303cf4a8fbc30a98299f24a81
record_format Article
spelling doaj-e4593da303cf4a8fbc30a98299f24a812020-11-25T00:26:16ZengUniversity of EdinburghSCRIPTed: A Journal of Law, Technology & Society1744-25671744-25672018-08-0115144110.2966/scrip.150118.4Law as a User: Design, Affordance, and the Technological Mediation of NormsLaurence Diver0University of Edinburgh School of LawTechnology law scholars have recently started to consider the theories of affordance and technological mediation, imported from the fields of psychology, human-computer interaction (HCI), and science and technology studies (STS). These theories have been used both as a means of explaining how the law has developed, and more recently in attempts to cast the law per se as an affordance. This exploratory paper summarises the two theories, before considering these applications from a critical perspective, noting certain deficiencies with respect to potential normative application and definitional clarity, respectively. It then posits that in applying them in the legal context we should seek to retain the relational user-artefact structure around which they were originally conceived, with the law cast as the user of the artefact, from which it seeks certain features or outcomes. This approach is effective for three reasons. Firstly, it acknowledges the power imbalance between law and architecture, where the former is manifestly subject to the decisions, made by designers, which mediate and transform the substance of the legal norms they instantiate in technological artefacts. Secondly, from an analytical perspective, it can help avoid some of the conceptual and definitional problems evident in the nascent legal literature on affordance. Lastly, approaching designers on their own terms can foster better critical evaluation of their activities during the design process, potentially leading to more effective ‘compliance by design’ where the course of the law’s mediation by technological artefacts can be better anticipated and guided by legislators, regulators, and legal practitioners.https://script-ed.org/?p=3534Affordancetechnological mediationpostphenomenologylegal theorycompliance by designlegal design
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Laurence Diver
spellingShingle Laurence Diver
Law as a User: Design, Affordance, and the Technological Mediation of Norms
SCRIPTed: A Journal of Law, Technology & Society
Affordance
technological mediation
postphenomenology
legal theory
compliance by design
legal design
author_facet Laurence Diver
author_sort Laurence Diver
title Law as a User: Design, Affordance, and the Technological Mediation of Norms
title_short Law as a User: Design, Affordance, and the Technological Mediation of Norms
title_full Law as a User: Design, Affordance, and the Technological Mediation of Norms
title_fullStr Law as a User: Design, Affordance, and the Technological Mediation of Norms
title_full_unstemmed Law as a User: Design, Affordance, and the Technological Mediation of Norms
title_sort law as a user: design, affordance, and the technological mediation of norms
publisher University of Edinburgh
series SCRIPTed: A Journal of Law, Technology & Society
issn 1744-2567
1744-2567
publishDate 2018-08-01
description Technology law scholars have recently started to consider the theories of affordance and technological mediation, imported from the fields of psychology, human-computer interaction (HCI), and science and technology studies (STS). These theories have been used both as a means of explaining how the law has developed, and more recently in attempts to cast the law per se as an affordance. This exploratory paper summarises the two theories, before considering these applications from a critical perspective, noting certain deficiencies with respect to potential normative application and definitional clarity, respectively. It then posits that in applying them in the legal context we should seek to retain the relational user-artefact structure around which they were originally conceived, with the law cast as the user of the artefact, from which it seeks certain features or outcomes. This approach is effective for three reasons. Firstly, it acknowledges the power imbalance between law and architecture, where the former is manifestly subject to the decisions, made by designers, which mediate and transform the substance of the legal norms they instantiate in technological artefacts. Secondly, from an analytical perspective, it can help avoid some of the conceptual and definitional problems evident in the nascent legal literature on affordance. Lastly, approaching designers on their own terms can foster better critical evaluation of their activities during the design process, potentially leading to more effective ‘compliance by design’ where the course of the law’s mediation by technological artefacts can be better anticipated and guided by legislators, regulators, and legal practitioners.
topic Affordance
technological mediation
postphenomenology
legal theory
compliance by design
legal design
url https://script-ed.org/?p=3534
work_keys_str_mv AT laurencediver lawasauserdesignaffordanceandthetechnologicalmediationofnorms
_version_ 1725345180649783296