A validation study of frameworks for responsible automatically processable regulation

Abstract Governments and private companies worldwide are increasingly turning to artificial intelligence to enhance the efficiency and accessibility of legal processes. This shift towards automatically processable regulation (APR) carries the risk to negatively affect citizens in various ways. Therefore, ethical guidelines and frameworks that support the fair, accountable, and transparent transformation of law into automatically processable regulation have emerged. However, little empirical research has validated that the introduction and use of such ethical frameworks actually leads to more responsible implementations of automatically processable regulation overall. In this study, we address this research gap through a pre-registered randomized controlled experiment that validates two frameworks to foster responsibility when implementing automatically processable regulations, the “Responsible Automatically Processable Regulation” ( R -APR) framework, and the UK Government’s framework “Ethics, Transparency and Accountability Framework for Automated Decision-Making”. In the experiment, participants ( $$n=48$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>48</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> ) were tasked to design an automated process to implement a specific piece of legislation. Guided by one of the two responsibility frameworks randomly allocated, the participants were given the opportunity to update their initial designs. Finally, the participants and two experts evaluated the initial and final designs. We find that both frameworks lead participants to adapt their original designs when requested to do so and that the updated designs are indeed evaluated as more responsible; our study hence evidences that organizations should be encouraged—if not mandated—to make use of a framework for responsible legal automation towards the minimization of negative societal effects.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
AI & Society
Published
2025-07-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-025-02479-4
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.37

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A validation study of frameworks for responsible automatically processable regulation

Dimitri Van Landuyt, Simon Mayer, Clement Guitton, Aurelia Tamò‐Larrieux et al.
1 citations
AI & Society
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
2.37
article

A validation study of frameworks for responsible automatically processable regulation

Dimitri Van Landuyt, Simon Mayer, Clement Guitton, Aurelia Tamò‐Larrieux, Vlada Druta, Jonah Bellemans
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract Governments and private companies worldwide are increasingly turning to artificial intelligence to enhance the efficiency and accessibility of legal processes. This shift towards automatically processable regulation (APR) carries the risk to negatively affect citizens in various ways. Therefore, ethical guidelines and frameworks that support the fair, accountable, and transparent transformation of law into automatically processable regulation have emerged. However, little empirical research has validated that the introduction and use of such ethical frameworks actually leads to more responsible implementations of automatically processable regulation overall. In this study, we address this research gap through a pre-registered randomized controlled experiment that validates two frameworks to foster responsibility when implementing automatically processable regulations, the “Responsible Automatically Processable Regulation” ( R -APR) framework, and the UK Government’s framework “Ethics, Transparency and Accountability Framework for Automated Decision-Making”. In the experiment, participants ( $$n=48$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>48</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> ) were tasked to design an automated process to implement a specific piece of legislation. Guided by one of the two responsibility frameworks randomly allocated, the participants were given the opportunity to update their initial designs. Finally, the participants and two experts evaluated the initial and final designs. We find that both frameworks lead participants to adapt their original designs when requested to do so and that the updated designs are indeed evaluated as more responsible; our study hence evidences that organizations should be encouraged—if not mandated—to make use of a framework for responsible legal automation towards the minimization of negative societal effects.

AI & SocietyVol. 41(1)
University of St.Gallen (CH), University of Lausanne (CH), KU Leuven (BE)
Universität St. Gallen, KU Leuven, Vlaamse regering
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
2.37
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.