Drivers of partially automated vehicles are blamed for crashes that they cannot reasonably avoid

Abstract

People seem to hold the human driver to be primarily responsible when their partially automated vehicle crashes, yet is this reasonable? While the driver is often required to immediately take over from the automation when it fails, placing such high expectations on the driver to remain vigilant in partially automated driving is unreasonable. Drivers show difficulties in taking over control when needed immediately, potentially resulting in dangerous situations. From a normative perspective, it would be reasonable to consider the impact of automation on the driver’s ability to take over control when attributing responsibility for a crash. We, therefore, analyzed whether the public indeed considers driver ability when attributing responsibility to the driver, the vehicle, and its manufacturer. Participants blamed the driver primarily, even though they recognized the driver’s decreased ability to avoid the crash. These results portend undesirable situations in which users of partially driving automation are the ones held responsible, which may be unreasonable due to the detrimental impact of driving automation on human drivers. Lastly, the outcome signals that public awareness of such human-factors issues with automated driving should be improved.

Sonographer interaction with artificial intelligence: collaboration or conflict?

“…These mundane monitoring tasks are known to be very challenging and are often performed poorly by humans 45 . This is a problem in non‐medical areas, such as autonomous driving, and has not yet been solved definitively 46 .…”

In the Hands of a Robot, From the Operating Room to the Courtroom: The Medicolegal Considerations of Robotic Surgery

“…If the crash involved fully autonomous vehicles, the human users were held less liable, and a majority of the responsibility was to be shouldered by the manufacturer and the government department that issued the manufacturing licenses [ 53 ]. But there have been instances where the driver has been attributed to blame despite having limited ability to avoid the accident [ 54 ]. Experts have analyzed these cases and also noted that there is a certain amount of bias when it comes to rewarding compensation for victims in such cases.…”

Editorial: Ethical design of artificial intelligence-based systems for decision making

“…Establishing clear frameworks for assigning responsibility and addressing questions of negligence, oversight, and the potential for unintended consequences is essential to ensure accountability for the decisions made by AI systems, capable of making autonomous decisions across various domains without human intervention. Balancing the autonomy of AI systems with human judgment and intervention is necessary to prevent undue reliance on AI decisions and preserve human agency and accountability (see Beckers, 2022 ; Cavalcante Siebert and Lupetti, 2023 ).…”