Revision of Role Requirements Changing the Status of Unchanged Conduct: How a Change in What a Role Requires Can Change the Status of the Same Conduct

This conceptual paper introduces Revision of Role Requirements Changing the Status of Unchanged Conduct, a relation in which changes to a role’s requirements alter the status of otherwise unchanged conduct. With the occupant and conduct held fixed, a performance that previously completed the role can leave a duty unmet once a valid revision applies. The paper asks who validly adopted a requirement, what it covers, and which date or event determines its application. Adoption, actual compliance, and the requirement’s justification are assessed separately. An unadopted proposal or voluntary practice does not by itself establish the revised duty. The discussion connects the relation to Fuller’s account of legal prospectivity and examines the revised police caution introduced in England and Wales on April 10, 1995. The paper compares unchanged opening words under the earlier and revised requirements, using the documented revision to show how a new duty can alter their status. Part of the Power, Permission, and Obligation series within On Human Modeling, the paper examines who revises a role and who bears the resulting duties. Its framework can inform human–AI research on separating changes in requirements from changes in performance when evaluating behavior over time.