IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v155y2022icp1-10.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Autonomous vehicles and moral judgments under risk

Author

Listed:
  • Krügel, Sebastian
  • Uhl, Matthias

Abstract

Some criticize the data-driven study of driverless car ethics for relying on deterministic crash scenarios where the focus should be on minimizing the occurrence of accidents instead. Indeed, decisions in road traffic are taken in the domain of risk. A relevant ethical question is, however, whether autonomous vehicles should actually minimize an accident’s probability or rather balance the accident’s probability and severity. While ethicists’ introspections might lead them to different conclusions, a participatory paradigm in ethics demands to include laypeople’s intuitions into the societal debate. In three online studies, we found that the mere minimization of accident probability in ethical dilemmas does not correspond to the views of our sample. Our participants favor a balanced consideration of accident probability and severity. This remains true even if the underlying dilemma is based on a more realistic scenario of allocating minor risks among road users. Our findings furthermore illustrate that trolley problems may be informative for autonomous vehicles and emphasize the importance of transparency if manufacturers and the public do not agree on guiding principles in road traffic.

Suggested Citation

  • Krügel, Sebastian & Uhl, Matthias, 2022. "Autonomous vehicles and moral judgments under risk," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 1-10.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:155:y:2022:i:c:p:1-10
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2021.10.016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856421002718
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2021.10.016?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adnan, Nadia & Md Nordin, Shahrina & bin Bahruddin, Mohamad Ariff & Ali, Murad, 2018. "How trust can drive forward the user acceptance to the technology? In-vehicle technology for autonomous vehicle," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 819-836.
    2. Edmond Awad & Sohan Dsouza & Richard Kim & Jonathan Schulz & Joseph Henrich & Azim Shariff & Jean-François Bonnefon & Iyad Rahwan, 2020. "Reply to: Life and death decisions of autonomous vehicles," Nature, Nature, vol. 579(7797), pages 3-5, March.
    3. Edmond Awad & Sohan Dsouza & Richard Kim & Jonathan Schulz & Joseph Henrich & Azim Shariff & Jean-François Bonnefon & Iyad Rahwan, 2018. "The Moral Machine experiment," Nature, Nature, vol. 563(7729), pages 59-64, November.
    4. repec:cup:judgdm:v:9:y:2014:i:1:p:65-76 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Cunningham, Mitchell L. & Regan, Michael A. & Horberry, Timothy & Weeratunga, Kamal & Dixit, Vinayak, 2019. "Public opinion about automated vehicles in Australia: Results from a large-scale national survey," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 1-18.
    6. Yochanan E. Bigman & Kurt Gray, 2020. "Life and death decisions of autonomous vehicles," Nature, Nature, vol. 579(7797), pages 1-2, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Burak Can Altay & Abdullah Erdem Boztas & Abdullah Okumuş & Muhammet Gul & Erkan Çelik, 2023. "How Will Autonomous Vehicles Decide in Case of an Accident? An Interval Type-2 Fuzzy Best–Worst Method for Weighting the Criteria from Moral Values Point of View," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-20, June.
    2. Dai, Jingchen & Wang, Xiaokun Cara & Ma, Wenxin & Li, Ruimin, 2023. "Future transport vision propensity segments: A latent class analysis of autonomous taxi market," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    3. Mamak, Kamil & Glanc, Jadwiga, 2022. "Problems with the prospective connected autonomous vehicles regulation: Finding a fair balance versus the instinct for self-preservation," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    4. Eberhard Feess & Gerd Muehlheusser, 2022. "Autonomous Vehicles: Moral Dilemmas and Adoption Incentives," CESifo Working Paper Series 9825, CESifo.
    5. Poszler, Franziska & Geisslinger, Maximilian & Betz, Johannes & Lütge, Christoph, 2023. "Applying ethical theories to the decision-making of self-driving vehicles: A systematic review and integration of the literature," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    6. Feess, Eberhard & Muehlheusser, Gerd, 2024. "Autonomous Vehicles: Moral dilemmas and adoption incentives," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Feess, Eberhard & Muehlheusser, Gerd, 2024. "Autonomous Vehicles: Moral dilemmas and adoption incentives," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    2. Qian, Lixian & Yin, Juelin & Huang, Youlin & Liang, Ya, 2023. "The role of values and ethics in influencing consumers’ intention to use autonomous vehicle hailing services," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    3. Ljubi, Klara & Groznik, Aleš, 2023. "Role played by social factors and privacy concerns in autonomous vehicle adoption," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 1-15.
    4. Eberhard Feess & Gerd Muehlheusser, 2022. "Autonomous Vehicles: Moral Dilemmas and Adoption Incentives," CESifo Working Paper Series 9825, CESifo.
    5. Kassens-Noor, Eva & Cai, Meng & Kotval-Karamchandani, Zeenat & Decaminada, Travis, 2021. "Autonomous vehicles and mobility for people with special needs," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 385-397.
    6. Joanna Sleigh & Shannon Hubbs & Alessandro Blasimme & Effy Vayena, 2024. "Can digital tools foster ethical deliberation?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-10, December.
    7. Klockmann, Victor & von Schenk, Alicia & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2022. "Artificial intelligence, ethics, and intergenerational responsibility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 203(C), pages 284-317.
    8. Weina Qu & Hongli Sun & Yan Ge, 2021. "The effects of trait anxiety and the big five personality traits on self-driving car acceptance," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(5), pages 2663-2679, October.
    9. Zhang, Qiyuan & Wallbridge, Christopher D. & Jones, Dylan M. & Morgan, Phillip L., 2024. "Public perception of autonomous vehicle capability determines judgment of blame and trust in road traffic accidents," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    10. Gansser, Oliver Alexander & Reich, Christina Stefanie, 2021. "A new acceptance model for artificial intelligence with extensions to UTAUT2: An empirical study in three segments of application," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    11. Staněk, Rostislav & Krčál, Ondřej & Čellárová, Katarína, 2022. "Pull yourself up by your bootstraps: Identifying procedural preferences against helping others in the presence of moral hazard," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    12. Phakphum Sakuljao & Wichuda Satiennam & Thaned Satiennam & Nopadon Kronprasert & Sittha Jaensirisak, 2023. "Understanding Intention to Use Conditionally Automated Vehicles in Thailand, Based on an Extended Technology Acceptance Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-15, January.
    13. MARTENS, David, 2020. "FAT Flow: A data science ethics framework," Working Papers 2020004, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    14. Hensel, Lukas & Witte, Marc & Caria, A. Stefano & Fetzer, Thiemo & Fiorin, Stefano & Götz, Friedrich M. & Gomez, Margarita & Haushofer, Johannes & Ivchenko, Andriy & Kraft-Todd, Gordon & Reutskaja, El, 2022. "Global Behaviors, Perceptions, and the Emergence of Social Norms at the Onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 473-496.
    15. Sindi, Safaa & Woodman, Roger, 2021. "Implementing commercial autonomous road haulage in freight operations: An industry perspective," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 235-253.
    16. Arias-Oliva, Mario & Pelegrín-Borondo, Jorge & Lara-Palma, Ana María & Juaneda-Ayensa, Emma, 2020. "Emerging cyborg products: An ethical market approach for market segmentation," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    17. Elias Fernández Domingos & Inês Terrucha & Rémi Suchon & Jelena Grujić & Juan Burguillo & Francisco Santos & Tom Lenaerts, 2022. "Delegation to artificial agents fosters prosocial behaviors in the collective risk dilemma," Post-Print hal-04296038, HAL.
    18. Vanduy Tran & Shengchuan Zhao & El Bachir Diop & Weiya Song, 2019. "Travelers’ Acceptance of Electric Carsharing Systems in Developing Countries: The Case of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-22, September.
    19. Xiaobei Jiang & Wenlin Yu & Wenjie Li & Jiawen Guo & Xizheng Chen & Hongwei Guo & Wuhong Wang & Tao Chen, 2021. "Factors Affecting the Acceptance and Willingness-to-Pay of End-Users: A Survey Analysis on Automated Vehicles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-12, November.
    20. Ünveren, Burak & Durmaz, Tunç & Sunal, Seçkin, 2023. "AI revolution and coordination failure: Theory and evidence," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:155:y:2022:i:c:p:1-10. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.