|
|
[Home] [Help] [Databases] [WorldLII] [Feedback] |
|
Alternative Law Journal |
Sue Scott
Sue Scott is Director of the Online Legal Access
Project at the law Foundation of NSW.
Informed participation in the legal system is integral to a democratic and
civil society. Knowledge of the law is a necessary basis for civic activity, and
for people’s capacity to comply with, use, and critique the law.
A number of reports on how to increase access to justice highlight the lack
of knowledge of the legal system and the need to provide up-to date, relevant
information:
... the [Law Reform] Commission noted that there appears to be a general lack of knowledge about the legal system among Australians and that this lack of knowledge denies many people the opportunity to participate in the process or to understand the reason why the legal system affects them in particular ways ... a co-ordinated information strategy involving the Commonwealth and State agencies would ensure a far better use of resources.[1]
... the real access issue is obtaining good up-to-date information — it is therefore important that community workers are well informed about social security and about how to access advice and information.[2]
The
Internet would seem to provide an ideal way to provide this up-to-date, relevant
information. It has the potential to reach a wide audience, material is easily
updated, and costs are less than providing the same material in print. There is
already an impressive amount of Australian legal information being provided free
of charge via the Internet, including legislation, case law and plain English
guides to the law.
But what do we know about whether this material is reaching the people in
the community who need it? In this article I draw together findings from the
research literature on both information-seeking behaviour and Internet use, and
discuss the implications of these findings for provision of legal information
via the Internet.
As well as having the potential to increase knowledge and understanding of
the law in our society, the Internet has the potential to increase citizen
participation in the framing and application of the law. This is an important
issue but it is not one I discuss in this article.
Despite the seeming dominance of the written word in our society, oral
culture dominates in the area of information seeking. Research has consistently
found that people turn to other people as their first preference when they have
an information need. This is as true of highly educated professionals as it is
of the urban poor.
Scott in his study into the information needs of migrants in Australia
found that government agencies, medical people and friends and acquaintances
were the most important first source of
information.[3] He found that
printed matter was very little used as an information source on its own. Women
in domestic violence situations go to friends and family most often, and then
helping professionals such as their local
doctor.[4] Primary care family
physicians use colleagues and specialists as their primary source of medical
information.[5]
These findings are not surprising when you think about it. Dealing with a
person fills a variety of needs: interpersonal sources provide social support,
and can handle special individual needs and questions due to their ability to
give immediate feedback relevant to the
situation.[6]
Asking other people leads to greater success in finding information. In a
large scale study of the information needs of residents of Seattle, USA, Dervin
found that being directed by others was the most successful information-seeking
strategy.[7] Young people commonly
report having sought legal advice as a result of advice from a third party,
rather than on the basis of their general
knowledge.[8]
The key implication of this research is the need to use the communications
capabilities of the Internet to link people with other people. But don’t
expect the delivery of information via the Internet to reduce the need for
people to provide services. If anything, the Internet may increase demand for
personal service provision through access to email services and increased
awareness of services. It will, however, provide the opportunity for people to
be better informed and to reach the service they need more quickly. Some of the
communications capabilities of the Internet are:
People will choose the path of least resistance in their quest for
information; information is more likely to be used if it is readily accessible.
Time and effort, cost, inconvenience and inadequate personal libraries were
found to be barriers to physicians’ use of information
sources.[9] Accessibility was the
single most important determinant of resource use in a study of the information
use of engineers.[10] This behaviour
is related to the principle of least effort — most people, most of the
time, are put off by modest hurdles.
Providing resources via the Internet has the potential to greatly increase
use by increasing accessibility. There is an enormous difference between having
to track down a document in a library and being able to print it out from your
computer. There are indications that this is changing information-seeking
behaviour. In the USA 24.8 million adults accessed the Internet to find health
information in July 1999.[11]
Whether this is also true of the law is difficult to say. Reliable
statistics on use of the Internet for legal inquiries are not readily available.
The Legal Help pages <http://www. lawsocnsw.asn.au/legalhelp> provided by
the Law Society of NSW had 203,000 hits in their first month. More research
needs to be done on who is accessing these plain English legal sites and how
people are using the material.
There are several factors which need to be in place to ensure that the
Internet is a convenient information source:
There is evidence that a large segment of the population doesn’t have
a high level of information literacy. Landauer found
that:[12]
There are particular problems associated with using the Internet
to find Australian legal information.
I observed ten ‘ordinary’ users searching for
information.[13] As it happened
these ten ordinary users were all professionals and tertiary educated, but none
of them understood how the Internet worked. I observed and recorded a search
done by a journalist who was tertiary trained. She had been using the Internet
for a year. The steps she followed are set out in the boxed section.
|
EXAMPLE Search carried out by searcher with one year’s experience Looking for the Wallis Lake Oyster case that was before
Federal Court. Netsearch comes up as first screen She chooses the search engine which comes up — Excite
She enters Oysters and Australia She gets 862 hits ‘Too many’ she says, and doesn’t look at
the results She tries oysters and Australia AND federal
court She gets 182 hits ‘Very unsatisfactory’ she says She tries Wallis lake AND oysters She gets 52 hits ‘Looking a lot better’ she says She finds a newspaper article but still looking for the
Federal Court connection ‘I’ll look for the home page of the Federal
Court and see if I can find the case that way’ she says She tries Federal Court and
Australia’ She gets 7,799,370 hits ‘That’s a lot’ she says She goes to the Federal Government web site which comes up
on this page and does a keyword search ‘Not having much luck here’. Scrolls down the
page. ‘Not here’ she says She tries the subject entry point — Departments and
Agencies ‘I’ll go the Attorney Generals Department
— don’t know if the Federal Court is part of it’ she
says When she goes there it brings up the Department of Admin
Services She tries again and it does the same thing She gives up. |
This search actually shows a reasonably high level of search
sophistication, as one would expect from a journalist. She knew that the
case was before the Federal Court, she knew to limit the search to
Australia, and she knew about using Boolean operators. She even thought
to try the Attorney-General’s Department. But she didn’t find
what she wanted. Note that the search was carried out in July 1998, and
results on the same search carried out today may vary.
Statistics show that many of the most popular search engines used by
Australians are based in the United States. As a result, much of the material
retrieved does not relate to Australia. For example, in October 1999 a search in
Yahoo <http://www.yahoo.com> on ‘child custody’ retrieves 73
sites, none of which relate to Australia. Adding the word
‘Australia’ to the search brings up the movie Silent Scream
— an empathic look at the Aboriginal lost generation and brutality and
deaths of Aboriginals in custody. As well, a large amount of irrelevant
material can be found. For example, a search on the words ‘renting
bonds’ in Netscape brings up material on security bonds and bonds on hire
cars.
It is essential that legal information be accurate and authoritative, but
the material found on an Internet search can be of questionable quality. Many
legal sites don’t provide information about who is responsible for the
site or when the material was last updated.
Further, a lot of primary legal material isn’t indexed by commercial
search engines. As legal problems are often one-off, users won’t have
built up a knowledge of relevant legal sites.
Four strategies would address these issues:
Internet access is increasing rapidly. In August 1999, 41% of Australians
(5.6 million adults) had accessed the Internet in the previous 12 months. This
is almost double the 23% of Australians who were accessing the Internet in
February 1998.[14]
Younger age groups had the greatest proportion of Internet users with 74%
of 18-24 year olds accessing the Internet. There was a steady decline over the
remaining age groups, down to 10% of people aged 55 years and over.
There are indications that socio-economic indicators affect Internet
access. Unemployed adults are less likely to access the Internet (39%) than
adults in full employment (57%). More people in capital cities access the
Internet (44%) than people in rural areas (35%).
These usage statistics call for well publicised Internet access available
in the community, in locations such as public libraries, court houses and
community centres (1.1 million adults had accessed the Internet from either a
public library or school in the 12 months to August
1999).[15]
Further, demographics should be taken into account when planning whether to
deliver information and services via the Internet, for example, tenancy
information may be particularly appropriate because of the higher number of
tenants in younger age groups, as opposed to information about retirement
village rights. Providing access through key points in the community will,
however, overcome this to some extent.
If asking another person is the preferred means of finding information,
what is the role and value of written information? Research in this area is not
definitive, but there are indications that printed information is valued and
useful, especially when used in conjunction with advice.
Scott in his study of the information needs of migrants found that the
maximum effectiveness of information leaflets is achieved when used by trained
resource people. Sources of advice which were rated as most helpful tended to
use printed matter to a significantly greater extent than those sources rated as
the ‘least
helpful’.[16]
A study of the usefulness of information booklets for patients leaving
hospital found that among patients who had received the booklet there was an
appreciable increase in the accuracy and thoroughness of patient recall of
important medical details concerning their illness and its
treatment.[17]
A study of the information needs of victims of domestic violence found that
30% had consulted reading material for help in answering
questions.[18] Written health
information is valued for the ability to refer back to it at different times,
but it depends on the information being appropriate and useful. ‘The
leaflet was good because I had something to keep which had everything written
down’.[19] Dervin found that
in resolved situations respondents were more likely to have reported that they
had read something relating to the
problem.[20]
Written information is also of value to those working with people with
legal needs. A study into the legal aid needs of youth found that the ability of
youth workers to identify their clients’ legal problems and appropriately
respond to or refer such problems is dependent on worker knowledge. Of these 75%
had gained their legal knowledge through legal resources
books.[21]
Thus while it is useful and worthwhile to provide legal information
resources via the Internet, this information will be of most use when delivered
in conjunction with other forms of assistance. Providers of legal support and
information need to be trained to use the Internet to assist them provide
written information to supplement face to face services.
In the previous section I referred to the need for information to be
appropriate and useful. Some research has been done on this but there is room
for more, especially in the area of legal information.
A number of studies have pointed out that information can satisfy emotional
as well as cognitive needs.[22]
Information is not used only to obtain facts. Dervin found that people collect
information for many reasons, including getting self-control, for social
support, and for clarifying
causes.[23]
The kinds of questions asked by victims of domestic violence support this
finding:[24]
People are looking for stories,
different viewpoints, and
information.[25] A site on domestic
violence, for example, might contain victim’s stories, police, legal and
medical perspectives and factual information about where to get help.
An evaluation of a video giving information about adoption confirms this
hypothesis.[26] When asked what they
liked about the video, participants listed the following:
The research calls for the following
responses:
Information is meaningless until it is assimilated and used. The ability to
do this will depend on the level of existing knowledge of the user. A trained
lawyer will understand a contract much more quickly and effectively than a lay
person with no experience with contracts.
This may sound like a truism but it links back to the need to deliver
information in conjunction with face to face services and / or education
programs, so as to allow for the development of understanding.
Comprehension is linked to
readability[27] — also a
truism but an important issue with the law. The provision of legislation via the
Internet doesn’t make the law more accessible if it cannot be understood
and acted on.
Comprehension is also linked to the level of literacy in written English.
The Survey of Aspects of Literacy found that almost half of Australians
aged 15-74 (6.2 million people) have ‘poor’ or ‘very
poor’ prose literacy
skills.[28]
At the same time, one should never presume that only a trained professional
is capable of understanding ‘professional’ tools. Existing knowledge
is not static, and often increases dramatically with need and exposure to a
situation. An extreme case is the self-litigant who ends up with great expertise
in the legal issues relating to their case.
Internet resources about the law should be provided in plain English, and
in languages other than English. But it should not be assumed that the provision
of information will result in the comprehension and use of the information. The
provision of written information in conjunction with face to face service or
education programs will facilitate comprehension.
Hypertext links should be used to provide pathways from plain English to
more sophisticated resources, allowing the development of expertise. This
approach acknowledges the need for entry level material, and provides the option
of going further if the user wants to.
The technology should be used to assist comprehension. This could include
use of audio, diagrams, videos and online legal guidance. Links to a number of
these tools can be found at
<http://lawfoundation.net.au/olap/innovate.html#onl>.
Evaluation of a system providing online guidance for domestic violence
shows it has been successful in achieving its aims of simplifying the process of
applying for apprehended violence
orders.[29] It is significant,
however, that the system is designed to be used only in conjunction with some
form of trained support. The evaluation found that the program was least
successful in situations where this support was not readily available.
Because of the significant literacy problems in our society, we need to
provide support structures for people carrying out processes such as filling in
forms and writing letters. Online legal guidance systems can assist those in the
support roles as well as more literate end-users.
Information does have value both as a way of increasing understanding of
legal rights and responsibilities, and of fulfilling emotional needs; the
Internet does have a role to play in delivering this information to a wide
audience.
At the same time this is only one cog in the complex process of dealing
with a legal problem. It is important to guard against the ‘magic
bullet’ approach, as exemplified in this prediction: ‘Legal services
kiosks could assist millions of additional clients at very low cost by
channeling routine, repetitive cases to self-help
kiosks’.[30]
Information is a step along the way, not a product. People want their
problem solved, they do not want a piece of
information.[31] It is not enough to
simply provide web sites with legal information on them, no matter how well the
information is packaged. Information is only of value if it is found, used and
understood. Careful consideration needs to be given to how this can most
effectively be achieved.
In the short term at least, the key to successfully delivering legal
information and services via the Internet is to use it as an adjunct to personal
support from, say, community agencies, lawyers, or health professionals. For
this to be successfully achieved, those providing the support must be adequately
resourced, and have access to the Internet and the ability to use it
effectively. Technology must be used to enhance social information networks
rather than replace them.
This article has assessed the implications for the delivery of legal
information and advice via the Internet drawing on research into how people find
and use information. There are, however, no definitive answers. The Internet is
a new and constantly changing medium, and there is a need for ongoing monitoring
and research in this area. I welcome discussion, disagreement, and alternative
realities.
References
[1] Australian Law Reform
Commission 1992, Multiculturalism and the Law, Sydney,
1992.
[2] Women’s Legal
Resources Centre, ‘Quarter Way to Equal: A Report on Barriers to Access to
Legal Services for Migrant Women’, Law Foundation of NSW,
1994.
[3] Scott, W., ‘Survey
into the Information Needs of Migrants in Australia: Final Report’, AGPS,
1980.
[4] Keys Young,
‘Against the Odds: How Women Survive Domestic Violence, The needs of women
experiencing domestic violence who do not use domestic violence and related
crisis services’, Federal Office of the Status of Women,
1998.
[5] Gruppen, L. and others,
‘Information Seeking Strategies and Differences among Primary Care
Physicians’, (1987) 7(3) Mobius
18-26.
[6] Schramm, W., Men,
Messages and Media, Harper and Rowe,
1973.
[7] Dervin, B., The
Development of Strategies for Dealing with Information Needs of Urban Residents,
ED 125-640, Washington University, Seattle,
1977.
[8] O’Connor, I. and
Tilbury, C., Legal Aid Needs of Youth, Legal Aid Branch,
Attorney-General’s Department, AGPS, Sydney,
1986.
[9] Huth, E., ‘The
Underused Medical Literature’, (1989) 110(2) Annals of Internal
Medicine 99-100.
[10]
Gerstberger, P. and Allen, T., ‘Criteria used by Research and Development
Engineers in the Selection of an Information Source’, (1968) 52 Journal
of Applied Psychology
272-9.
[11] Cyber Dialog,
Cyber Dialogue Reports that Doctors Are Missing Internet Health Opportunity,
Press release, 12 October 1999
<http://www.cyberdialogue.com/press/releases/cch-intel-doctors.html> last
accessed 20 January 2000.
[12]
Landauer, T. and others, ‘Enhancing the Usability of Text through Computer
Delivery and Formative Evaluation: the SuperBook Project’, in C. McKnight,
A. Dillon and J. Richardson (eds), Hypertext: a Psychological
Perspective, Ellis Horwood, New York, 1993,
pp.71-136.
[13] Scott, S.,
Destination Information: Using the Internet as an Information Resource,
unpublished, 1998, available from email:
sscott@lawfoundation.net.au
[14]
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), Use of Internet by Householders,
Australia, August 1999, Catalogue No. 8147.0, Sydney,
1999.
[15] ABS above, ref.
14.
[16] Scott, W., above, ref.
3.
[17] Sandler, D. and others,
‘Is an Information Booklet for Patients Leaving Hospital Helpful and
Useful?’, (1989) British Medical Journal 298 at
870-4.
[18] Harris, R.M,
‘The Information Needs of Battered Women’, (1988) 28(1) RQ
62-70.
[19] Buckland, S.,
Unmet Needs for Health Information, Help for Health Trust, Winchester,
1995.
[20] Dervin, B, above, ref.
7.
[21] O’Connor, I. and
Tilbury, C., above.
[22] Wilson,
T., ‘Information Needs and Uses: Fifty Years of Progress?’, (1994)
Journal of Documentation
15-51.
[23] Dervin, B., ‘An
Overview of Sense-Making Research: Concepts, Methods and Results to Date’,
paper presented at the International Communications Assn Meeting, Dallas, 1993
<<http://edfu.lis.uiuc. edu/allerton/96/wl/Dervin83a.html>> last
accessed 20 January 2000.
[24]
Harris, R.M, above, ref. 18.
[25]
Dervin, B., above, ref. 23.
[26]
Law Foundation of NSW, Post Adoption Resource Centre: Survey on the Path
Ahead, video, ‘Grants evaluation report 2nd Quarter 1998/99’,
Law Foundation of NSW, 1999.
[27]
Kintsch, W., Text Comprehension, Memory, and Learning. (1994) 49 American
Psychologist 294-303.
[28]
Australian Bureau of Statistics, ‘Aspects of Literacy: Assessed Skill
Levels, Australia, 1996’, Catalogue No. 4228.0,
1996.
[29] National Center for
State Courts, Internet-based Domestic Violence Court Preparation System
Evaluation, unpublished, 1998. For more information about this project
contact Richard Zorza or Joyce Klemperer, 121 Sixth Ave, New York, NY 10013, tel
212-925-6675, fax 212-925-5675, e-mail: rzorza@fcny.org or
jklemper@fcny.org
[30] US Office
of Inspector General Legal Services Corporation, ‘Increasing Legal
Services Delivery Capacity through Information Technology’, 1996
<http://oig.lsc.gov/tech/excsum.htm>.
[31]
Dervin, B., above, ref. 7.