297
Views
1
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Articles

Selfish but Socially Approved: The Effects of Perceived Collision Algorithms and Social Approval on Attitudes toward Autonomous Vehicles

&
Pages 3717-3727 | Received 05 Sep 2021, Accepted 13 Jul 2022, Published online: 01 Aug 2022

References

  • Atkinson, J., & Kim, Y. (2015). I drink it anyway and I know I shouldn’t: Understanding green consumers’ positive evaluations of norm-violating non-green products and misleading green advertising. Environmental Communication, 9(1), 37–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2014.932817
  • Awad, E., Dsouza, S., Kim, R., Schulz, J., Henrich, J., Shariff, A., Bonnefon, J.-F., & Rahwan, I. (2018). The moral machine experiment. Nature, 563(7729), 59–64. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0637-6
  • Belay, N. (2015). Robot ethics and self-driving cars: How ethical determinations in software will require a new legal framework. Journal of the Legal Profession, 40, 119–130.
  • Bergmann, L. T., Schlicht, L., Meixner, C., König, P., Pipa, G., Boshammer, S., & Stephan, A. (2018). Autonomous vehicles require socio-political acceptance – An empirical and philosophical perspective on the problem of moral decision making. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 12, 31. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2018.00031
  • Bonnefon, J.-F., Shariff, A., & Rahwan, I. (2016). The social dilemma of autonomous vehicles. Science, 352(6293), 1573–1576. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf2654
  • Bonnefon, J.-F., Shariff, A., & Rahwan, I. (2019). The trolley, the bull bar, and why engineers should care about the ethics of autonomous cars. Proceedings of the IEEE, 107(3), 502–504. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2019.2897447
  • Buckley, L., Kaye, S.-A., & Pradhan, A. K. (2018). Psychosocial factors associated with intended use of automated vehicles: A simulated driving study. Accident; Analysis and Prevention, 115, 202–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2018.03.021
  • Chan, R. Y. K., Wong, Y. H., & Leung, T. K. P. (2008). Applying ethical concepts to the study of “Green” consumer behavior: An analysis of Chinese consumers’ intentions to bring their own shopping bags. Journal of Business Ethics, 79(4), 469–481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9410-8
  • Choi, J. K., & Ji, Y. G. (2015). Investigating the importance of trust on adopting an autonomous vehicle. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 31(10), 692–702. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2015.1070549
  • Coca-Vila, I. (2018). Self-driving cars in dilemmatic situations: An approach based on the theory of justification in criminal law. Criminal Law and Philosophy, 12(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11572-017-9411-3
  • Dixon, G., Hart, P. S., Clarke, C., O’Donnell, N. H., & Hmielowski, J. (2020). What drives support for self-driving car technology in the United States? Journal of Risk Research, 23(3), 275–287. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2018.1517384
  • Du, H., Zhu, G., & Zheng, J. (2021). Why travelers trust and accept self-driving cars: An empirical study. Travel Behaviour and Society, 22, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2020.06.012
  • Faulhaber, A. K., Dittmer, A., Blind, F., Wächter, M. A., Timm, S., Sütfeld, L. R., Stephan, A., Pipa, G., & König, P. (2019). Human decisions in moral dilemmas are largely described by utilitarianism: Virtual car driving study provides guidelines for autonomous driving vehicles. Science and Engineering Ethics, 25(2), 399–418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-018-0020-x
  • FeldmanHall, O., Mobbs, D., Evans, D., Hiscox, L., Navrady, L., & Dalgleish, T. (2012). What we say and what we do: The relationship between real and hypothetical moral choices. Cognition, 123(3), 434–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.02.001
  • Frank, D.-A., Chrysochou, P., Mitkidis, P., & Ariely, D. (2019). Human decision-making biases in the moral dilemmas of autonomous vehicles. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-49411-7
  • Goodall, N. J. (2014). Ethical decision making during automated vehicle crashes. Transportation Research Record, 2424(1), 58–65. https://doi.org/10.3141/2424-07
  • Himmelreich, J. (2018). Never mind the trolley: The ethics of autonomous vehicles in mundane situations. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 21(3), 669–684. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-018-9896-4
  • Kallioinen, N., Pershina, M., Zeiser, J., Nosrat Nezami, F., Pipa, G., Stephan, A., & König, P. (2019). Moral judgements on the actions of self-driving cars and human drivers in dilemma situations from different perspectives. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2415. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02415
  • Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480–498. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480
  • Kyriakidis, M., Happee, R., & de Winter, J. C. F. (2015). Public opinion on automated driving: Results of an international questionnaire among 5000 respondents. Transportation Research Part F, 32, 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2015.04.014
  • Lee, J., Baig, F., & Li, X. (2021). Media influence, trust, and the public adoption of automated vehicles. IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Magazine, 2–15. https://doi.org/10.1109/MITS.2021.3082404
  • Li, H., & Sakamoto, Y. (2014). Social Impacts in social media: An examination of perceived truthfulness and sharing of information. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 278–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.08.009
  • Li, J., Zhao, X., Cho, M.-J., Ju, W., & Malle, B. F. (2016). From trolley to autonomous vehicle: Perceptions of responsibility and moral norms in traffic accidents with self-driving cars. Proceedings of the Society of Automotive Engineers World Congress, USA. http://www.xuan-zhao.com/uploads/5/6/1/6/5616522/li_et_al_sae_paper_on_av_dilemma.pdf
  • Liu, H., Yang, R., Wang, L., & Liu, P. (2019). Evaluating initial public acceptance of highly and fully autonomous vehicles. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 35(11), 919–931. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1561791
  • Liu, P., & Liu, J. (2021). Selfish or utilitarian automated vehicles? Deontological evaluation and public acceptance. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 37(13), 1231–1242. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2021.1876357
  • Liu, P., & Xu, Z. (2020). Public attitude toward self-driving vehicles on public roads: Direct experience changed ambivalent people to be more positive. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 151, 119827. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119827
  • Mackie, D. M. (1987). Systematic and nonsystematic processing of majority and minority persuasive communications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(1), 41–52. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.53.1.41
  • Mannes, A. E. (2009). Are we wise about the wisdom of crowds? The use of group judgments in belief revision. Management Science, 55(8), 1267–1279. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1090.1031
  • Paharia, N., Vohs, K. D., & Deshpandé, R. (2013). Sweatshop labor is wrong unless the shoes are cute: Cognition can both help and hurt moral motivated reasoning. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 121(1), 81–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.01.001
  • Patil, I., Cogoni, C., Zangrando, N., Chittaro, L., & Silani, G. (2014). Affective basis of judgment-behavior discrepancy in virtual experiences of moral dilemmas. Social Neuroscience, 9(1), 94–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2013.870091
  • Schoettle, B., & Sivak, M. (2014). Public opinion about self-driving vehicles in China, India, Japan, the US, the UK, and Australia. Transportation Research Institute. http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/109433/103139.pdf?sequence=1
  • Surowiecki, J. (2005). The wisdom of crowds. Anchor Books.
  • Tassy, S., Oullier, O., Mancini, J., & Wicker, B. (2013). Discrepancies between judgment and choice of action in moral dilemmas. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 250. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00250
  • Ward, C., Raue, M., Lee, C., D’Ambrosio, L., & Coughlin, J. F. (2017). Acceptance of automated driving across generations: The role of risk and benefit perception, knowledge, and trust. In: M. Kurosu (ed.), Human-computer interaction. User interface design, development and multimodality. HCI 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 10271. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58071-5_20
  • Wintersberger, P., Prison, A. K., Riener, A., Hasirlioglu, S. (2017). The experience of ethics: Evaluation of self harm risks in automated vehicles. In IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), June 11–14, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1109/IVS.2017.7995749
  • Zhang, T., Tao, D., Qu, X., Zhang, X., Lin, R., & Zhang, W. (2019). The roles of initial trust and perceived risk in public’s acceptance of automated vehicles. Transportation Research Part C, 98, 207–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2018.11.018
  • Zhang, T., Zeng, W., Zhang, Y., Tao, D., Li, G., & Qu, X. (2021). What drives people to use automated vehicles? A meta-analytic review. Accident, 159, 106270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2021.106270
  • Zhu, G., Chen, Y., & Zheng, J. (2020). Modelling the acceptance of fully autonomous vehicles: A media-based perception and adoption model. Transportation Research Part F, 73, 80–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2020.06.004

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.