Risk and the regulatory challenges of smart consumer products

When harm occurs—a normal accident? Psychological harm—an elusive concept Summary and conclusion Disclosure statement References Full Article Figures & data References Citations Metrics Reprints & Permissions View PDF(open in a new window)View EPUB(open in a new window) Previous article View latest articles Next article Osman’s (Citation2025) consideration of psychological harm and its applications to consumer products with internet connectivity (CPIC) convincingly emphasises the scale of the challenge faced by regulators in navigating the complex and ever-evolving landscape of connected products. The nature of the challenge is compounded not only by the pace of change, but also by the intricacies in defining what psychological harm means. In the following, we build on the themes presented by Osman (Citation2025), considering characteristics of CPIC from the consumer’s perspective, which further complicate the regulatory landscape. We reflect on issues of clarity over the concept of psychological harm and the evidence for its existence, suggesting that without conceptual clarity and a sound evidential foundation, we risk wasting resources on performative measures, which distract from real issues and may do more harm than good.