IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v57y2019icp115-124.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Personality facets and ethics positions as directives for self-driving vehicles

Author

Listed:
  • Smith, Brent

Abstract

This article provides an exploration into how people of today would prefer the innovative self-driving vehicles (SDVs) of tomorrow to reconcile life and death decisions in accidents involving passengers and pedestrians. While SDVs are expected to occupy public roads and highways within several years, many stakeholders—drivers, passengers, pedestrians, cyclists, regulators, automakers, and insurers among them—have not achieved a full understanding of how SDVs should function in everyday traffic situations. Using logistic regression (n = 461), the author looks at how individuals' personality facets (HEXACO: honesty-humility; conscientiousness) and ethics positions (idealism; relativism) might relate to their directives for what SDVs should do/decide in the context of four established trolley problem vignettes. In all vignettes, any action/decision will result in zero-sum outcomes of survival and fatality for the parties involved (e.g., passenger, pedestrians). In essence, the results offer insights into how these underexplored human elements might help inform society's rules of the road and SDVs' moral algorithms in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Smith, Brent, 2019. "Personality facets and ethics positions as directives for self-driving vehicles," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 115-124.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:57:y:2019:i:c:p:115-124
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.12.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X1830109X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.12.006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter Mudrack & E. Mason, 2013. "Dilemmas, Conspiracies, and Sophie’s Choice: Vignette Themes and Ethical Judgments," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 118(3), pages 639-653, December.
    2. repec:aph:ajpbhl:10.2105/ajph.2016.303628_6 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Fleetwood, J., 2017. "Public health, ethics, and autonomous vehicles," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 107(4), pages 532-537.
    4. Peter Mudrack & E. Mason, 2013. "Ethical Judgments: What Do We Know, Where Do We Go?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 115(3), pages 575-597, July.
    5. repec:cup:judgdm:v:9:y:2014:i:1:p:65-76 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mamak, Kamil & Glanc, Jadwiga, 2022. "Problems with the prospective connected autonomous vehicles regulation: Finding a fair balance versus the instinct for self-preservation," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    2. Raza, Syed Arshad, 2021. "Managing ethical requirements elicitation of complex socio-technical systems with critical systems thinking: A case of course-timetabling project," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    3. Hamburger, Yair Amichai & Sela, Yaron & Kaufman, Sharon & Wellingstein, Tamar & Stein, Noy & Sivan, Joel, 2022. "Personality and the autonomous vehicle: Overcoming psychological barriers to the driverless car," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    4. Pereira, Vijay & Bamel, Umesh & Paul, Happy & Varma, Arup, 2022. "Personality and safety behavior: An analysis of worldwide research on road and traffic safety leading to organizational and policy implications," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 185-196.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Johannes Brinkmann, 2019. "The Potential Use of Sociological Perspectives for Business Ethics Teaching," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 156(1), pages 273-287, April.
    2. Peter E. Mudrack & E. Sharon Mason, 2022. "Vignette Themes and Moral Reasoning in Business Contexts: The Case for the Defining Issues Test," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 181(4), pages 979-995, December.
    3. Tabea Franziska Hirth-Goebel & Barbara E. Weißenberger, 2019. "Management accountants and ethical dilemmas: How to promote ethical intention?," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 287-322, October.
    4. Anania, Emily C. & Rice, Stephen & Walters, Nathan W. & Pierce, Matthew & Winter, Scott R. & Milner, Mattie N., 2018. "The effects of positive and negative information on consumers’ willingness to ride in a driverless vehicle," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 218-224.
    5. Jorge Pelegrín-Borondo & Mario Arias-Oliva & Kiyoshi Murata & Mar Souto-Romero, 2020. "Does Ethical Judgment Determine the Decision to Become a Cyborg?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 161(1), pages 5-17, January.
    6. Dickson, Geoff & Naylor, Michael & Phelps, Sean, 2015. "Consumer attitudes towards ambush marketing," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 280-290.
    7. Mark S. Schwartz, 2016. "Ethical Decision-Making Theory: An Integrated Approach," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 139(4), pages 755-776, December.
    8. Loréa Baïada-Hirèche & Ghislaine Garmilis, 2016. "Accounting Professionals’ Ethical Judgment and the Institutional Disciplinary Context: A French–US Comparison," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 139(4), pages 639-659, December.
    9. Scott Robbins & Aimee van Wynsberghe, 2022. "Our New Artificial Intelligence Infrastructure: Becoming Locked into an Unsustainable Future," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-11, April.
    10. Fatih Canıtez, 2021. "The Adoption of Autonomous Vehicles: A Socio-Technical Transition Perspective," Alphanumeric Journal, Bahadir Fatih Yildirim, vol. 9(2), pages 143-162, December.
    11. Darja Topolšek & Dario Babić & Darko Babić & Tina Cvahte Ojsteršek, 2020. "Factors Influencing the Purchase Intention of Autonomous Cars," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-16, December.
    12. Hazel Si Min Lim & Araz Taeihagh, 2019. "Algorithmic Decision-Making in AVs: Understanding Ethical and Technical Concerns for Smart Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-28, October.
    13. Loréa Baïada-Hirèche & Lionel Garreau, 2014. "Exploring the dynamics of ethical judgment : the sensemaking-based evolution model," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) halshs-01009708, HAL.
    14. Michal Krawczyk & Joanna Tyrowicz & Wojciech Hardy, 2020. "Online and physical appropriation: evidence from a vignette experiment on copyright infringement," Behaviour and Information Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(4), pages 481-496, April.
    15. Rice, Stephen & Winter, Scott R. & Mehta, Rian & Tamilselvan, Gajapriya & Anania, Emily C. & Milner, Mattie N., 2021. "Identifying the factors that predict a Consumer's willingness to ride in various types of driverless vehicles," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    16. Chikaraishi, Makoto & Khan, Diana & Yasuda, Banri & Fujiwara, Akimasa, 2020. "Risk perception and social acceptability of autonomous vehicles: A case study in Hiroshima, Japan," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 105-115.
    17. Lukovics, Miklós & Udvari, Beáta & Zuti, Bence & Kézy, Béla, 2018. "Az önvezető autók és a felelősségteljes innováció [Self-driving vehicles and responsible innovation]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(9), pages 949-974.
    18. Cherise Small & Charlene Lew, 2021. "Mindfulness, Moral Reasoning and Responsibility: Towards Virtue in Ethical Decision-Making," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 169(1), pages 103-117, February.
    19. Loréa Baïada-Hirèche & Lionel Garreau, 2014. "Exploring the dynamics of ethical judgment : the sensemaking-based evolution model," Post-Print halshs-01009708, HAL.
    20. Gurumurthy, Krishna Murthy & Kockelman, Kara M., 2020. "Modeling Americans’ autonomous vehicle preferences: A focus on dynamic ride-sharing, privacy & long-distance mode choices," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:57:y:2019:i:c:p:115-124. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.