Literature DB >> 29357047

Human Decisions in Moral Dilemmas are Largely Described by Utilitarianism: Virtual Car Driving Study Provides Guidelines for Autonomous Driving Vehicles.

Anja K Faulhaber1, Anke Dittmer1, Felix Blind1, Maximilian A Wächter2, Silja Timm1, Leon R Sütfeld1, Achim Stephan1, Gordon Pipa1, Peter König1,3.   

Abstract

Ethical thought experiments such as the trolley dilemma have been investigated extensively in the past, showing that humans act in utilitarian ways, trying to cause as little overall damage as possible. These trolley dilemmas have gained renewed attention over the past few years, especially due to the necessity of implementing moral decisions in autonomous driving vehicles (ADVs). We conducted a set of experiments in which participants experienced modified trolley dilemmas as drivers in virtual reality environments. Participants had to make decisions between driving in one of two lanes where different obstacles came into view. Eventually, the participants had to decide which of the objects they would crash into. Obstacles included a variety of human-like avatars of different ages and group sizes. Furthermore, the influence of sidewalks as potential safe harbors and a condition implicating self-sacrifice were tested. Results showed that participants, in general, decided in a utilitarian manner, sparing the highest number of avatars possible with a limited influence by the other variables. Derived from these findings, which are in line with the utilitarian approach in moral decision making, it will be argued for an obligatory ethics setting implemented in ADVs.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Autonomous driving; Moral dilemma; Trolley problem; Utilitarianism

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29357047     DOI: 10.1007/s11948-018-0020-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics        ISSN: 1353-3452            Impact factor:   3.525


  12 in total

1.  Killing, letting die, and the trolley problem.

Authors:  Judith J Thomson
Journal:  Monist       Date:  1976-04

2.  Virtual morality: emotion and action in a simulated three-dimensional "trolley problem".

Authors:  C David Navarrete; Melissa M McDonald; Michael L Mott; Benjamin Asher
Journal:  Emotion       Date:  2011-11-21

3.  Bayesian inference for psychometric functions.

Authors:  Malte Kuss; Frank Jäkel; Felix A Wichmann
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2005-05-27       Impact factor: 2.240

Review 4.  Universal moral grammar: theory, evidence and the future.

Authors:  John Mikhail
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2007-02-27       Impact factor: 20.229

5.  Autonomous Cars: In Favor of a Mandatory Ethics Setting.

Authors:  Jan Gogoll; Julian F Müller
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2016-07-14       Impact factor: 3.525

6.  The social dilemma of autonomous vehicles.

Authors:  Jean-François Bonnefon; Azim Shariff; Iyad Rahwan
Journal:  Science       Date:  2016-06-24       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  The Role of Self-Sacrifice in Moral Dilemmas.

Authors:  Sonya Sachdeva; Rumen Iliev; Hamed Ekhtiari; Morteza Dehghani
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-15       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Responsibility for crashes of autonomous vehicles: an ethical analysis.

Authors:  Alexander Hevelke; Julian Nida-Rümelin
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2014-06-11       Impact factor: 3.525

9.  Forced-choice decision-making in modified trolley dilemma situations: a virtual reality and eye tracking study.

Authors:  Alexander Skulmowski; Andreas Bunge; Kai Kaspar; Gordon Pipa
Journal:  Front Behav Neurosci       Date:  2014-12-16       Impact factor: 3.558

10.  Using Virtual Reality to Assess Ethical Decisions in Road Traffic Scenarios: Applicability of Value-of-Life-Based Models and Influences of Time Pressure.

Authors:  Leon R Sütfeld; Richard Gast; Peter König; Gordon Pipa
Journal:  Front Behav Neurosci       Date:  2017-07-05       Impact factor: 3.558

View more
  9 in total

Review 1.  Public acceptance and perception of autonomous vehicles: a comprehensive review.

Authors:  Kareem Othman
Journal:  AI Ethics       Date:  2021-02-26

2.  Interindividual neural differences in moral decision-making are mediated by alpha power and delta/theta phase coherence.

Authors:  Annemarie Wolff; Javier Gomez-Pilar; Takashi Nakao; Georg Northoff
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-03-14       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  How does the method change what we measure? Comparing virtual reality and text-based surveys for the assessment of moral decisions in traffic dilemmas.

Authors:  Leon René Sütfeld; Benedikt V Ehinger; Peter König; Gordon Pipa
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-10-09       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Moral Judgements on the Actions of Self-Driving Cars and Human Drivers in Dilemma Situations From Different Perspectives.

Authors:  Noa Kallioinen; Maria Pershina; Jannik Zeiser; Farbod Nosrat Nezami; Gordon Pipa; Achim Stephan; Peter König
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2019-11-01

5.  Ethical and Statistical Considerations in Models of Moral Judgments.

Authors:  Torty Sivill
Journal:  Front Robot AI       Date:  2019-08-16

6.  Human injury-based safety decision of automated vehicles.

Authors:  Qingfan Wang; Qing Zhou; Miao Lin; Bingbing Nie
Journal:  iScience       Date:  2022-06-30

7.  A Study of Common Principles for Decision-Making in Moral Dilemmas for Autonomous Vehicles.

Authors:  Li Li; Junyou Zhang; Shufeng Wang; Qian Zhou
Journal:  Behav Sci (Basel)       Date:  2022-09-19

Review 8.  Moral Decision Making: From Bentham to Veil of Ignorance via Perspective Taking Accessibility.

Authors:  Rose Martin; Petko Kusev; Joseph Teal; Victoria Baranova; Bruce Rigal
Journal:  Behav Sci (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-01

9.  Self-protective and self-sacrificing preferences of pedestrians and passengers in moral dilemmas involving autonomous vehicles.

Authors:  Maike M Mayer; Raoul Bell; Axel Buchner
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-12-23       Impact factor: 3.240

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.