Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38698973›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2024

Willingness to take responsibility: Self-sacrifice versus sacrificing others in takeover decisions during autonomous driving.

Uijong Ju, Sanghyeon Kim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Uijong JuDepartment of Information Display, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, South Korea.
Sanghyeon KimDepartment of Information Display, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, South Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In Level-3 autonomous driving, drivers are required to take over in an emergency upon receiving a request from an autonomous vehicle (AV). However, before the deadline for the takeover request expires, drivers are not considered fully responsible for the accident, which may make them hesitant to assume control and take on full liability before the time runs out. Therefore, to prevent problems caused by late takeover, it is important to know which factors influence a driver's willingness to take over in an emergency. To address this issue, we recruited 250 participants each for both video-based and text-based surveys to investigate the takeover decision in a dilemmatic situation that can endanger the driver, with the AV either sacrificing a group of pedestrians or the driver if the participants do not intervene. The results showed that 88.2% of respondents chose to take over when the AV intended to sacrifice the driver, while only 59.4% wanted to take over when the pedestrians would be sacrificed. Additionally, when the AV's chosen path matched the participant's intention, 77.4% chose to take over when the car intended to sacrifice the driver compared with only 34.3% when the pedestrians would be sacrificed. Furthermore, other factors such as sex, driving experience, and driving preferences partially influenced takeover decisions; however, they had a smaller effect than the situational context. Overall, our findings show that regardless of the driving intention of an AV, informing drivers that their safety is at risk can enhance their willingness to take over control of an AV in critical situations.

Indexed as

Autonomous vehicleResponsibilityTakeoverText surveyVideo survey

Identifiers

PMID38698973
PMCPMC11064069

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.