Ethical dilemmas are really important to potential adopters of autonomous vehicles

被引:37
作者
Gill, Tripat [1 ]
机构
[1] Wilfrid Laurier Univ, Lazaridis Sch Business & Econ, Waterloo, ON, Canada
关键词
Ethical dilemmas; Autonomous vehicles; Innovation adoption; Risk; Technology; TROLLEY; INNOVATION; ADOPTION; ALGORITHMS; DRIVERS; RISKS;
D O I
10.1007/s10676-021-09605-y
中图分类号
B82 [伦理学(道德学)];
学科分类号
摘要
The ethical dilemma (ED) of whether autonomous vehicles (AVs) should protect the passengers or pedestrians when harm is unavoidable has been widely researched and debated. Several behavioral scientists have sought public opinion on this issue, based on the premise that EDs are critical to resolve for AV adoption. However, many scholars and industry participants have downplayed the importance of these edge cases. Policy makers also advocate a focus on higher level ethical principles rather than on a specific solution to EDs. But conspicuously absent from this debate is the view of the consumers or potential adopters, who will be instrumental to the success of AVs. The current research investigated this issue both from a theoretical standpoint and through empirical research. The literature on innovation adoption and risk perception suggests that EDs will be heavily weighted by potential adopters of AVs. Two studies conducted with a broad sample of consumers verified this assertion. The results from these studies showed that people associated EDs with the highest risk and considered EDs as the most important issue to address as compared to the other technical, legal and ethical issues facing AVs. As such, EDs need to be addressed to ensure robustness in the design of AVs and to assure consumers of the safety of this promising technology. Some preliminary evidence is provided about interventions to resolve the social dilemma in EDs and about the ethical preferences of prospective early adopters of AVs.
引用
收藏
页码:657 / 673
页数:17
相关论文
共 79 条
[21]   Doubting Driverless Dilemmas [J].
De Freitas, Julian ;
Anthony, Sam E. ;
Censi, Andrea ;
Alvarez, George A. .
PERSPECTIVES ON PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2020, 15 (05) :1284-1288
[22]   MACHINE ETHICS: THE ROBOT'S DILEMMA [J].
Deng, Boer .
NATURE, 2015, 523 (7558) :24-26
[23]  
Dewitt B, 2019, NATURE, V567, P31, DOI 10.1038/d41586-019-00766-x
[24]   Algorithm Aversion: People Erroneously Avoid Algorithms After Seeing Them Err [J].
Dietvorst, Berkeley J. ;
Simmons, Joseph P. ;
Massey, Cade .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-GENERAL, 2015, 144 (01) :114-126
[25]  
Edmonds Ellen., 2019, AAA NewsRoom
[26]  
Finucane ML, 2000, J BEHAV DECIS MAKING, V13, P1, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(200001/03)13:1<1::AID-BDM333>3.0.CO
[27]  
2-S
[28]   HOW SAFE IS SAFE ENOUGH - PSYCHOMETRIC STUDY OF ATTITUDES TOWARDS TECHNOLOGICAL RISKS AND BENEFITS [J].
FISCHHOFF, B ;
SLOVIC, P ;
LICHTENSTEIN, S ;
READ, S ;
COMBS, B .
POLICY SCIENCES, 1978, 9 (02) :127-152
[29]  
Foot P., 1967, OXF REV, V5, P5