Exploring moral algorithm preferences in autonomous vehicle dilemmas: an empirical study

Frontiers in Psychology 14:1-12 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Introduction: This study delves into the ethical dimensions surrounding autonomous vehicles (AVs), with a specific focus on decision-making algorithms. Termed the “Trolley problem,” an ethical quandary arises, necessitating the formulation of moral algorithms grounded in ethical principles. To address this issue, an online survey was conducted with 460 participants in China, comprising 237 females and 223 males, spanning ages 18 to 70. Methods: Adapted from Joshua Greene’s trolley dilemma survey, our study employed Yes/No options to probe participants’ choices and Likert scales to gauge moral acceptance. The primary objective was to assess participants’ inclinations toward four distinct algorithmic strategies—Utilitarianism, Rawlsianism, Egoism, and a Hybrid approach—in scenarios involving AVs Results: Our findings revealed a significant disparity between participants’ preferences in scenarios related to AV design and those focused on purchase decisions. Notably, over half of the respondents expressed reluctance to purchase AVs equipped with an “egoism” algorithm, which prioritizes the car owner’s safety. Intriguingly, the rejection rate for “egoism” was similar to that of “utilitarianism,” which may necessitate self-sacrifice. Discussion: The hybrid approach, integrating “Utilitarianism” and “Egoism,” garnered the highest endorsement. This highlights the importance of balancing self-sacrifice and harm minimization in AV moral algorithms. The study’s insights are crucial for ethically and practically advancing AV technology in the continually evolving realm of autonomous vehicles.

Similar books and articles

A Rawlsian algorithm for autonomous vehicles.Derek Leben - 2017 - Ethics and Information Technology 19 (2):107-115.
Do negative mood states impact moral reasoning?Brian Barger & W. Pitt Derryberry - 2013 - Journal of Moral Education 42 (4):443-459.
Eliciting and Assessing our Moral Risk Preferences.Shang Long Yeo - 2024 - American Philosophical Quarterly 61 (2):109-126.
The Immoral Machine.John Harris - 2020 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 29 (1):71-79.
Real-Life Moral Judgment.Gillian R. Wark - 1996 - Dissertation, Simon Fraser University (Canada)

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-11-28

Downloads
260 (#76,452)

6 months
260 (#8,835)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Tingting Sui
Peking University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations