ArticleScience and engineering ethics2017
Autonomous Cars: In Favor of a Mandatory Ethics Setting.
Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
27 citing papers in PubMed.
- Self-protective and self-sacrificing preferences of pedestrians and passengers in moral dilemmas involving autonomous vehicles.PloS one · 2021Trial
- Application and design of a decision-making model in ethical dilemma for self-driving cars.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A Confucian Algorithm for Autonomous Vehicles.Science and engineering ethics · 2024Article
- Ethical Decision-Making for Self-Driving Vehicles: A Proposed Model & List of Value-Laden Terms that Warrant (Technical) Specification.Science and engineering ethics · 2024Article
- Trolleys, crashes, and perception-a survey on how current autonomous vehicles debates invoke problematic expectations.AI and ethics · 2024Article
- A Study of Common Principles for Decision-Making in Moral Dilemmas for Autonomous Vehicles.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- The German Act on Autonomous Driving: Why Ethics Still Matters.Philosophy & technology · 2022Article
- Humans, machines, and double standards? The moral evaluation of the actions of autonomous vehicles, anthropomorphized autonomous vehicles, and human drivers in road-accident dilemmas.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Personal ethical settings for driverless cars and the utility paradox: An ethical analysis of public attitudes in UK and Japan.PloS one · 2022Article
- Moral Decision Making: From Bentham to Veil of Ignorance via Perspective Taking Accessibility.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- From driverless dilemmas to more practical commonsense tests for automated vehicles.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021Article
- Public acceptance and perception of autonomous vehicles: a comprehensive review.AI and ethics · 2021Review
- A Deeper Look at Autonomous Vehicle Ethics: An Integrative Ethical Decision-Making Framework to Explain Moral Pluralism.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2021Article
- The Relativistic Car: Applying Metaethics to the Debate about Self-Driving Vehicles.Ethical theory and moral practice : an international forum · 2021Article
- Toward ethical cognitive architectures for the development of artificial moral agents.Cognitive systems research · 2020Article
- Customizable Ethics Settings for Building Resilience and Narrowing the Responsibility Gap: Case Studies in the Socio-Ethical Engineering of Autonomous Systems.Science and engineering ethics · 2020Article
- Should Manual Driving be (Eventually) Outlawed?Science and engineering ethics · 2020Article
- Imaginative Value Sensitive Design: Using Moral Imagination Theory to Inform Responsible Technology Design.Science and engineering ethics · 2020Article
- Artificial Moral Agents: A Survey of the Current Status.Science and engineering ethics · 2020Review
- Driving in the Dark: Designing Autonomous Vehicles for Reducing Light Pollution.Science and engineering ethics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The recent progress in the development of autonomous cars has seen ethical questions come to the forefront. In particular, life and death decisions regarding the behavior of self-driving cars in trolley dilemma situations are attracting widespread interest in the recent debate. In this essay we want to ask whether we should implement a mandatory ethics setting (MES) for the whole of society or, whether every driver should have the choice to select his own personal ethics setting (PES). While the consensus view seems to be that people would not be willing to use an automated car that might sacrifice themselves in a dilemma situation, we will defend the somewhat contra-intuitive claim that this would be nevertheless in their best interest. The reason is, simply put, that a PES regime would most likely result in a prisoner's dilemma.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27417644What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.