Mutual Shaping Between Technologies and Law: Memories of Norwegian E-health Infrastructures

Mutual Shaping Between Technologies and Law: Memories of Norwegian E-health Infrastructures

A.A. Zaytseva

Department of Informatics, University of Oslo, Norway

Page: 
242-252
|
DOI: 
https://doi.org/10.2495/DNE-V10-N3-242-252
Received: 
N/A
|
Accepted: 
N/A
|
Published: 
30 September 2015
| Citation

OPEN ACCESS

Abstract: 

This work suggests a method to study mutual shaping between technologies and law drawing on empirical evidence from two different and simultaneously developing patient-oriented information systems in e-health. The approach of Complex Adaptive Systems is applied to analyze documentary data in the first case to identify causal elements in the ‘memory’ of its design work, and the narrative data in situ and ex situ – for subsequent tracing of attractions in the legal environment. A hypothesis on whether both case studies share the same attractions is generated for further testing in the second case. Having replicated the method, the researcher provides explanations regarding the studied phenomenon based on empirical material of the Norwegian e-health sector.

Keywords: 

attraction, design work, information systems, law, memory, mutual shaping

  References

[1] Aalberts, B.P. & van der Hof, S., Digital signature blindness: analysis of legislative approaches toward electronic authentication, Tilburg, November 1999, online publication, http://heinonline.org/, pp. 2–72, 1999.

[2] Rzevski, G. & Skobelev, P. Managing Complexity, WIT Press: Ashurst, 2014.

[3] Koniaris, M., Anagnostopoulos I. & Vassiliou, Y., Network Analysis in the Legal Domain: A complex model for European Union legal sources. Physics and Society, Cornell University Library. Online publication, http://arxiv.org/abs/1501.05237

[4] Knackstedt, R., Eggert, M., Heddier, M., Chasin, F., & Becker, J., The relationship of IS and law: the perspective of and implications for IS research. ECIS 2013 Proceedings, paper 18, 2013.

[5] Waldrop, M.M., Complexity: the Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos. Simon & Schuster Paperbacks: New York, 1992.

[6] Kauffman, S.A. Investigations, Oxford University Press: New York, 2000.

[7] Feng, P. & Feenberg, A., Thinking about design: critical theory of technology and the design process. Philosophy and Design: From Engineering to Architecture, ed. P.E. Vermaas, P. Kroes, A. Light, & S.A. Moore, Springer Science Business Media B.V. pp. 105–118, 2008.

[8] Holland, J.H., Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems: an Introductory Analysis with Applications to Biology, Control, and Artificial Intelligence, Massachusetts Institute of Technology: Massachusetts, 1992.

[9] Wegner, D.M., A computer network model of human transactive memory. Social Cognition, 13(3), pp. 319–339, 1995. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/soco.1995.13.3.319

[10] Tsoukas, H. & Hatch, M.J., Complex thinking, complex practice: the case for a narrative approach to organizational complexity. Human Relations, 54, pp. 979–1013, 2001. doi: http:// dx.doi.org/10.1177/0018726701548001

[11] Kirsh, D. Thinking with external representations, AI & Society, 25, pp. 441–454, 2010. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00146-010-0272-8

[12] Luhman, J.T. & Boje, D.M., What is complexity science? a possible answer from narrative research. Emergence, 3(1), pp. 158–167, 2001. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327000 EM0301_10

[13] Byrne, D. & Callaghan, G. Complexity theory and the Social sciences: the state of the art, Routledge: London, New York, 2014.