Ethical considerations and moral implications of autonomous vehicles and unavoidable collisions

IF 1.4 Q4 ERGONOMICS
J. Robinson, Joseph Smyth, Roger Woodman, V. Donzella
{"title":"Ethical considerations and moral implications of autonomous vehicles and unavoidable collisions","authors":"J. Robinson, Joseph Smyth, Roger Woodman, V. Donzella","doi":"10.1080/1463922X.2021.1978013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract While it is widely agreed that automated and autonomous vehicles may provide safety benefits over vehicles with lower level or no automation, due to other road users there will still likely be situations where a collision is unavoidable. What should a vehicle that is operating autonomously do when it has no choice but to have a collision? And who should decide which vehicle manoeuvre is the most acceptable? These situations create moral dilemmas requiring consideration of the most acceptable and moral action of the vehicle. In this paper we explore current research in this domain and work towards enabling ethical solutions. We identify current experimental work (practical studies rather than theoretical studies) on this problem often contains fundamental flaws due to the lack of real-world validity within the studied scenarios. We argue that morality is highly context dependent and that participants need to be more engaged in the choices they are claiming to make. Suggestions for future work include virtual reality or simulation methodologies which promote immersivity to ensure procedural validity whilst retaining safety. We also identify current guidelines contradict public viewpoint and argue public attitude needs to be better understood to give autonomous and automated vehicle manufacturers confidence in their design.","PeriodicalId":22852,"journal":{"name":"Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1463922X.2021.1978013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ERGONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Abstract While it is widely agreed that automated and autonomous vehicles may provide safety benefits over vehicles with lower level or no automation, due to other road users there will still likely be situations where a collision is unavoidable. What should a vehicle that is operating autonomously do when it has no choice but to have a collision? And who should decide which vehicle manoeuvre is the most acceptable? These situations create moral dilemmas requiring consideration of the most acceptable and moral action of the vehicle. In this paper we explore current research in this domain and work towards enabling ethical solutions. We identify current experimental work (practical studies rather than theoretical studies) on this problem often contains fundamental flaws due to the lack of real-world validity within the studied scenarios. We argue that morality is highly context dependent and that participants need to be more engaged in the choices they are claiming to make. Suggestions for future work include virtual reality or simulation methodologies which promote immersivity to ensure procedural validity whilst retaining safety. We also identify current guidelines contradict public viewpoint and argue public attitude needs to be better understood to give autonomous and automated vehicle manufacturers confidence in their design.
自动驾驶汽车和不可避免的碰撞的伦理考虑和道德含义
摘要尽管人们普遍认为,与自动化水平较低或没有自动化的车辆相比,自动化和自动驾驶车辆可以提供安全优势,但由于其他道路使用者的原因,仍可能存在不可避免的碰撞情况。当一辆自动驾驶的汽车别无选择,只能发生碰撞时,该怎么办?谁应该决定哪种车辆操纵是最可接受的?这些情况造成了道德困境,需要考虑车辆最可接受的道德行为。在本文中,我们探讨了该领域的当前研究,并致力于实现伦理解决方案。我们发现,由于在所研究的场景中缺乏真实世界的有效性,目前关于这个问题的实验工作(实践研究而非理论研究)往往存在根本缺陷。我们认为,道德高度依赖于环境,参与者需要更多地参与他们声称要做出的选择。对未来工作的建议包括虚拟现实或模拟方法,这些方法可以促进沉浸感,以确保程序的有效性,同时保持安全。我们还发现,目前的指导方针与公众观点相矛盾,并认为需要更好地理解公众的态度,让自动驾驶和自动驾驶汽车制造商对其设计充满信心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
6.20%
发文量
38
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信