Human moral reasoning types in autonomous vehicle moral dilemma: A cross-cultural comparison of Korea and Canada

Rhim, Jimin; Lee, Gi-bbeum; Lee, Ji‐Hyun

doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.010

“…Matters relating to value system must be respected and prioritized. The decision will be made with full responsibility by considering the applicable value system (Rhim et al, 2020). Therefore, school leaders need to implement systematic decision-making practices in the school environment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effects of Principal’s Decision-making, Organizational Commitment and School Climate on Teacher Performance in Vocational High School Based on Teacher Perceptions

Mailool¹,

Kartowagiran²,

Retnowati³

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This quantitative research aims to analyze the effects of the principal's decision-making, organizational commitment and school climate on teacher performance in vocational high school. The research sample was 160 vocational school teachers in North Minahasa Regency with simple random sampling method. The data were collected using a Likert scale questionnaire 25 with statements. The data analysis was performed using simple linear regression and multiple linear regression. The results showed that the principal's decision-making, organizational commitment and school climate had a positive and significant effect on the performance of vocational school teachers, both partially and simultaneously. The results of this research can be an important reference for educational administrators at vocational high school level to design school strategies and policies that can encourage increased teacher performance to achieve better school productivity.

show abstract

“…An analysis of more than 40 million judgements on vignettes describing hypothetical dilemma situations concluded that people generally prefer self-driving cars to endanger fewer lives, endanger animals over people and endanger older people over younger people (Awad et al, 2018). Other moral judgement studies include simulation studies by Wintersberger et al (2017) and Wilson et al (2019) and vignette-based studies by Bonnefon et al (2016), Li et al (2016), Meder et al (2018), Smith (2019), and Rhim et al (2020). Importantly, Bonnefon et al (2016) found a discrepancy between what people deemed acceptable for self-driving cars to do in dilemma situations and their willingness to purchase cars that would act accordingly.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moral Judgements on the Actions of Self-Driving Cars and Human Drivers in Dilemma Situations From Different Perspectives

Kallioinen

¹

,

Pershina

²

,

Zeiser

³

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-driving cars have the potential to greatly improve public safety. However, their introduction onto public roads must overcome both ethical and technical challenges. To further understand the ethical issues of introducing self-driving cars, we conducted two moral judgement studies investigating potential differences in the moral norms applied to human drivers and self-driving cars. In the experiments, participants made judgements on a series of dilemma situations involving human drivers or self-driving cars. We manipulated which perspective situations were presented from in order to ascertain the effect of perspective on moral judgements. Two main findings were apparent from the results of the experiments. First, human drivers and self-driving cars were largely judged similarly. However, there was a stronger tendency to prefer self-driving cars to act in ways to minimize harm, compared to human drivers. Second, there was an indication that perspective influences judgements in some situations. Specifically, when considering situations from the perspective of a pedestrian, people preferred actions that would endanger car occupants instead of themselves. However, they did not show such a self-preservation tendency when the alternative was to endanger other pedestrians to save themselves. This effect was more prevalent for judgements on human drivers than self-driving cars. Overall, the results extend and agree with previous research, again contradicting existing ethical guidelines for self-driving car decision making and highlighting the difficulties with adapting public opinion to decision making algorithms.

show abstract

“…An analysis of more than 40 million judgements on vignettes describing hypothetical dilemma situations concluded that people generally prefer self-driving cars to endanger fewer lives, endanger animals over people and endanger older people over younger people (Awad et al, 2018). Other moral judgement studies include simulation studies by Wintersberger et al (2017) and Wilson et al (2019) and vignette-based studies by Bonnefon et al (2016), Li et al (2016), Meder et al (2018, Smith (2019), and Rhim et al (2020). Importantly, Bonnefon et al (2016) found a discrepancy between what people deemed acceptable for selfdriving cars to do in dilemma situations and their willingness to purchase cars that would act accordingly.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moral Judgements on the Actions of Self-driving Cars and Human Drivers in Dilemma Situations from Different Perspectives

Kallioinen¹,

Pershina²,

Zeiser³

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-driving cars have the potential to greatly improve public safety. However, their introduction onto public roads must overcome both ethical and technical challenges. To further understand the ethical issues of introducing self-driving cars, we conducted two moral judgement studies investigating potential differences in the moral norms applied to human drivers and self-driving cars. In the experiments, participants made judgements on a series of dilemma situations involving human drivers or self-driving cars. We manipulated which perspective situations were presented from in order to ascertain the effect of perspective on moral judgements. Two main findings were apparent from the results of the experiments. First, human drivers and self-driving cars were largely judged similarly. However, there was a stronger tendency to prefer self-driving cars to act in ways to minimize harm, compared to human drivers. Second, there was an indication that perspective influences judgements in some situations. Specifically, when considering situations from the perspective of a pedestrian, people preferred actions that would endanger car occupants instead of themselves. However, they did not show such a self-preservation tendency when the alternative was to endanger other pedestrians to save themselves. This effect was more prevalent for judgements on human drivers than self-driving cars. Overall, the results extend and agree with previous research, again contradicting existing ethical guidelines for self-driving car decision making and highlighting the difficulties with adapting public opinion to decision making algorithms.

show abstract

Human moral reasoning types in autonomous vehicle moral dilemma: A cross-cultural comparison of Korea and Canada

Cited by 51 publications

References 103 publications

The Effects of Principal’s Decision-making, Organizational Commitment and School Climate on Teacher Performance in Vocational High School Based on Teacher Perceptions

The Effects of Principal’s Decision-making, Organizational Commitment and School Climate on Teacher Performance in Vocational High School Based on Teacher Perceptions

Moral Judgements on the Actions of Self-Driving Cars and Human Drivers in Dilemma Situations From Different Perspectives

Moral Judgements on the Actions of Self-driving Cars and Human Drivers in Dilemma Situations from Different Perspectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About