IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0275812.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Personal ethical settings for driverless cars and the utility paradox: An ethical analysis of public attitudes in UK and Japan

Author

Listed:
  • Kazuya Takaguchi
  • Andreas Kappes
  • James M Yearsley
  • Tsutomu Sawai
  • Dominic J C Wilkinson
  • Julian Savulescu

Abstract

Driverless cars are predicted to dramatically reduce collisions and casualties on the roads. However, there has been controversy about how they should be programmed to respond in the event of an unavoidable collision. Should they aim to save the most lives, prioritise the lives of pedestrians, or occupants of the vehicle? Some have argued that driverless cars should all be programmed to minimise total casualties. While this would appear to have wide international public support, previous work has also suggested regional variation and public reluctance to purchase driverless cars with such a mandated ethical setting. The possibility that algorithms designed to minimise collision fatalities would lead to reduced consumer uptake of driverless cars and thereby to higher overall road deaths, represents a potential “utility paradox”. To investigate this paradox further, we examined the views of the general public about driverless cars in two online surveys in the UK and Japan, examining the influence of choice of a “personal ethical setting” as well as of framing on hypothetical purchase decisions. The personal ethical setting would allow respondents to choose between a programme which would save the most lives, save occupants or save pedestrians. We found striking differences between UK and Japanese respondents. While a majority of UK respondents wished to buy driverless cars that prioritise the most lives or their family members’ lives, Japanese survey participants preferred to save pedestrians. We observed reduced willingness to purchase driverless cars with a mandated ethical setting (compared to offering choice) in both countries. It appears that the public values relevant to programming of driverless cars differ between UK and Japan. The highest uptake of driverless cars in both countries can be achieved by providing a personal ethical setting. Since uptake of driverless cars (rather than specific algorithm used) is potentially the biggest factor in reducing in traffic related accidents, providing some choice of ethical settings may be optimal for driverless cars according to a range of plausible ethical theories.

Suggested Citation

  • Kazuya Takaguchi & Andreas Kappes & James M Yearsley & Tsutomu Sawai & Dominic J C Wilkinson & Julian Savulescu, 2022. "Personal ethical settings for driverless cars and the utility paradox: An ethical analysis of public attitudes in UK and Japan," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(11), pages 1-19, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0275812
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0275812
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0275812
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0275812&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0275812?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carlo Pugnetti & Remo Schläpfer, 2018. "Customer Preferences and Implicit Tradeoffs in Accident Scenarios for Self-Driving Vehicle Algorithms," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-13, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0275812. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.