IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/nathum/v4y2020i2d10.1038_s41562-019-0762-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Drivers are blamed more than their automated cars when both make mistakes

Author

Listed:
  • Edmond Awad

    (Media Lab, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
    University of Exeter Business School)

  • Sydney Levine

    (Media Lab, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
    Massachusetts Institute of Technology
    Harvard University)

  • Max Kleiman-Weiner

    (Massachusetts Institute of Technology
    Harvard University)

  • Sohan Dsouza

    (Media Lab, Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

  • Joshua B. Tenenbaum

    (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

  • Azim Shariff

    (University of British Columbia Vancouver)

  • Jean-François Bonnefon

    (Media Lab, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
    University of Toulouse Capitole)

  • Iyad Rahwan

    (Media Lab, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
    Max-Planck Institute for Human Development
    Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

Abstract

When an automated car harms someone, who is blamed by those who hear about it? Here we asked human participants to consider hypothetical cases in which a pedestrian was killed by a car operated under shared control of a primary and a secondary driver and to indicate how blame should be allocated. We find that when only one driver makes an error, that driver is blamed more regardless of whether that driver is a machine or a human. However, when both drivers make errors in cases of human–machine shared-control vehicles, the blame attributed to the machine is reduced. This finding portends a public under-reaction to the malfunctioning artificial intelligence components of automated cars and therefore has a direct policy implication: allowing the de facto standards for shared-control vehicles to be established in courts by the jury system could fail to properly regulate the safety of those vehicles; instead, a top-down scheme (through federal laws) may be called for.

Suggested Citation

  • Edmond Awad & Sydney Levine & Max Kleiman-Weiner & Sohan Dsouza & Joshua B. Tenenbaum & Azim Shariff & Jean-François Bonnefon & Iyad Rahwan, 2020. "Drivers are blamed more than their automated cars when both make mistakes," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(2), pages 134-143, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:nat:nathum:v:4:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1038_s41562-019-0762-8
    DOI: 10.1038/s41562-019-0762-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-019-0762-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41562-019-0762-8?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Chen, Changdong, 2024. "How consumers respond to service failures caused by algorithmic mistakes: The role of algorithmic interpretability," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    2. Zhai, Siming & Gao, Shan & Wang, Lin & Liu, Peng, 2023. "When both human and machine drivers make mistakes: Whom to blame?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    3. Mathieu Chevrier & Vincent Teixeira, 2024. "Algorithm Delegation and Responsibility: Shifting Blame to the Programmer?," GREDEG Working Papers 2024-04, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France, revised Sep 2024.
    4. 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).
    5. Cai, Yunhao & Jing, Peng & Wang, Baihui & Jiang, Chengxi & Wang, Yuan, 2023. "How does “over-hype” lead to public misconceptions about autonomous vehicles? A new insight applying causal inference," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    6. Zhao, Taiyang & Ran, Yaxuan & Wu, Banggang & Lynette Wang, Valerie & Zhou, Liying & Lu Wang, Cheng, 2024. "Virtual versus human: Unraveling consumer reactions to service failures through influencer types," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:nat:nathum:v:4:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1038_s41562-019-0762-8. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    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.