The more they think, the less they want: studying people’s attitudes about autonomous vehicles could also contribute to shaping them

Hubert Etienne, Florian Cova
{"title":"The more they think, the less they want: studying people’s attitudes about autonomous vehicles could also contribute to shaping them","authors":"Hubert Etienne,&nbsp;Florian Cova","doi":"10.1007/s43681-023-00385-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In the past years, many studies have surveyed people’s intuitions about moral dilemmas involving autonomous vehicles (AVs). One widespread rationale for this line of research has been that understanding people’s attitudes about such dilemmas might help increase the pace of the adoption of autonomous vehicles—a goal that certain researchers consider a pressing moral imperative. However, surveying people is not a neutral process that is independent of respondents’ opinions and responses: in fact, respondents’ opinions can be influenced merely by taking part in a survey. In this paper, we present the results of three studies that suggest that participating in such surveys impacts participants’ willingness to acquire AVs. In our studies, we find that reflecting on AV dilemmas negatively impacted participants' willingness. Based on these results, we argue that prompting the general population to focus on AV dilemmas might highlight aspects of AVs that discourage their adoption. This results in a tension between the main rationale for empirical research on AV dilemmas and the impact of this research on the public at large.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72137,"journal":{"name":"AI and ethics","volume":"5 1","pages":"633 - 640"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AI and ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s43681-023-00385-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the past years, many studies have surveyed people’s intuitions about moral dilemmas involving autonomous vehicles (AVs). One widespread rationale for this line of research has been that understanding people’s attitudes about such dilemmas might help increase the pace of the adoption of autonomous vehicles—a goal that certain researchers consider a pressing moral imperative. However, surveying people is not a neutral process that is independent of respondents’ opinions and responses: in fact, respondents’ opinions can be influenced merely by taking part in a survey. In this paper, we present the results of three studies that suggest that participating in such surveys impacts participants’ willingness to acquire AVs. In our studies, we find that reflecting on AV dilemmas negatively impacted participants' willingness. Based on these results, we argue that prompting the general population to focus on AV dilemmas might highlight aspects of AVs that discourage their adoption. This results in a tension between the main rationale for empirical research on AV dilemmas and the impact of this research on the public at large.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
想得越多,要得越少:研究人们对自动驾驶汽车的态度也有助于塑造自动驾驶汽车
在过去的几年里,许多研究调查了人们对涉及自动驾驶汽车(av)的道德困境的直觉。这一系列研究的一个普遍的基本原理是,了解人们对这种困境的态度可能有助于加快采用自动驾驶汽车的步伐——某些研究人员认为这是一个紧迫的道德要求。然而,调查人们并不是一个中立的过程,不依赖于受访者的意见和反应:事实上,受访者的意见可以仅仅通过参与调查而受到影响。在本文中,我们提出了三项研究的结果,表明参与此类调查会影响参与者获得自动驾驶汽车的意愿。在我们的研究中,我们发现反思AV困境对参与者的意愿有负向影响。基于这些结果,我们认为,促使普通大众关注自动驾驶困境可能会突出自动驾驶阻碍其采用的方面。这导致了AV困境实证研究的主要原理与该研究对广大公众的影响之间的紧张关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Scenario-based sociotechnical envisioning (SSE): an approach to enhance systemic risk assessments Perceptions and predictors of trust in artificial intelligence use: ethical implications and regulatory oversight in Ghana Temporal authorship as a moral right: bounded inquiry in persistent AI delegation Machine Learning in Education Still unsafe: what’s holding us back on online safety for women
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1