Understanding Compliance Differences between Legal and Social Norms: The Case of Smoking Ban
The values shared within a society influence the (social) behaviour of the agents in that society. This connection goes through implicit and explicit norms. Agents act in situations where different, possibly conflicting, norms are applicable. In the case of a norm conflict, an agent will decide to comply with one or more of the applicable norms, while violating others. Our interest is how the type of the norms may play a role in such decision, and take the chosen behaviour of an agent to depend on a personal preference order on the norm types.
We distinguish three different types of norms: legal norms, social norms and private norms. We use the introduction of the law prohibiting smoking in cafes as illustration: we present a simulation of this situation involving agents’ preferences over different norm types. The results of this simulation are used for an explorative a model for normative reasoning based on norm types. We discuss a possible connection between the composition of a society in terms of these profiles and its culture and the relevance of the model with respect to value sensitive design of socio-technological systems.
KeywordsSocial Norm Legal Norm Norm Type Sensitive Design Norm Compliance
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Aldewereld, H.: Autonomy vs. Conformity - an Institutional Perspective on Norms and Protocols. PhD thesis, Univ. of Utrecht (2007)Google Scholar
- 3.Bicchieri, C.: The Grammar of Society. Cambridge University Press (2006)Google Scholar
- 7.Flanagan, M., Howe, D., Nissenbaum, H.: Values in design: Theory and practice. In: van den Hoven, M.J., Weckert, J. (eds.) Information Technology and Moral Philosophy. Cambridge University Press (2008)Google Scholar
- 8.Friedman, B.: Value sensitive design. In: Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction, pp. 769–774. Berkshire Publishing Group (2008)Google Scholar
- 9.Grossi, D.: Designing Invisible Handcuffs - Formal Investigations in Institutions and Organizations for Multi-Agent Systems. PhD thesis, Univ. of Utrecht (2007)Google Scholar
- 10.Hansson, S.O.: The Structure of Values and Norms. Cambridge University Press (2001)Google Scholar
- 11.Hofstede, G.: Culture’s Consequences, Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations. Sage Publications (2001)Google Scholar
- 12.Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G.: Cultural dimensions (2003), http://www.geert-hofstede.com/
- 13.International Tobacco Control Nederland. ITC policy evaluation project – de effecten van de rookvrije horeca op rookgedrag. eerste nameting (2009), http://www.stivoro.nl (in Dutch)
- 14.López, F.L., Luck, M., d’Inverno, M.: Constraining autonomy through norms. In: AAMAS 2002, pp. 674–681. ACM (2002)Google Scholar
- 15.Manders-Huits, N., van den Hoven, J.: The need for a value-sensitive design of communication infrastructures. In: Sollie, P., Düwell, M. (eds.) Evaluating New Technologies. The International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology, vol. 3, pp. 51–60. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
- 16.Overbeek, S.J., Dignum, M.V., Tan, Y.-H.: Towards a value-sensitive system to support agents in norm fulfillment and enforcement. Presented at IAT4EB (2010)Google Scholar
- 18.Repast organization for architecture and development (2003), http://repast.sourceforge.net
- 20.van den Hoven, M.J.: Design for values and values for design. Information Age +. Journal of the Australian Computer Society 7(2), 4–7 (2005)Google Scholar
- 21.van den Hoven, M.J.: ICT and Value Sensitive Design. In: Goujon, P., et al. (eds.) The Information Society. IFIP, vol. 233, pp. 67–72. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar