ArticleEthics and information technology2021
Ethical dilemmas are really important to potential adopters of autonomous vehicles.
Article in Ethics and information technology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Goodness behind a wheel: moral judgment in realistic traffic simulations featuring Agents, Deeds, and Consequences.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Empowering safer socially sensitive autonomous vehicles using human-plausible cognitive encoding.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Moral Complexity in Traffic: Advancing the ADC Model for Automated Driving Systems.Science and engineering ethics · 2025Article
- "All things equal": ethical principles governing why autonomous vehicle experts change or retain their opinions in trolley problems-a qualitative study.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2025Article
- Article
- Morality on the road: the ADC model in low-stakes traffic vignettes.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Article
- The moral machine experiment on large language models.Royal Society open science · 2024Article
- Trolleys, crashes, and perception-a survey on how current autonomous vehicles debates invoke problematic expectations.AI and ethics · 2024Article
- Guilt Without Fault: Accidental Agency in the Era of Autonomous Vehicles.Science and engineering ethics · 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10676-021-09605-y.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.