Moral reasoning and automatic risk reaction during driving

• Alaieri F, Vellino A (2016) Ethical decision making in robots: Autonomy, trust and responsibility. In: Agah A, Cabibihan JJ, Howard AM, Salichs MA, He H (eds) Social robotics. Springer, Cham, pp 159–168

• Allen C, Smit I, Wallach W (2005) Artificial morality: top-down, bottom-up, and hybrid approaches. Ethics Inf Technol 7(3):149–155

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Appiah KA (2008) Experiments in ethics. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

  Google Scholar 

• Awad E, Dsouza S, Kim R, Schulz J, Henrich J, Shariff A, Rahwan I (2018) The moral machine experiment. Nature, 563(7729):59–64

• Bartels DM (2008) Principled moral sentiment and the flexibility of moral judgment and decision making. Cognition 108:381–417

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Bengtsson, P. (2018). Attuning the pedestrian-vehicle and driver-vehicle: why attributing a mind to a vehicle matters. In: W. Karwowski, T. Ahram (Eds) International conference on intelligent human systems integration. Springer, Cham, pp 19–22

• Bergmann LT, 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. Front Behav Neurosci 12:31

• Bjorndahl A, London AJ, Zollman KJ (2017) Kantian decision making under uncertainty: dignity, price, and consistency. Philosopher's Imprint 17(7)

• Bojarski M, Testa DD, Dworakowski D, Firner B, Flepp B, Goyal P, Zhao J (2016) End-to-end learning for self-driving cars. arXiv abs/1604.07316

• Bojarski M, YeresP, Choromanaska A, Choromanski K, Firner B, Jackel L, Muller U (2017) Explaining how a deep neural network trained with end-to-end learning steers a car. arXivabs/1704.07911

• Bonnefon JF, Shariff A, Rahwan I (2016) The social dilemma of autonomous vehicles. Science 352(6293):1573–1576

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Chen LC, Schwing A, Yuille A, Urtasun R (2015) Learning deep structured models. In International Conference on Machine Learning (pp. 1785–1794). PMLR

• Crisman JD, Thorpe CE (1993) SCARF: a color vision system that tracks roads and intersections. IEEE Trans Robot Autom 9:49–58

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Davnall R (2019) Solving the single-vehicle self-driving car trolley problem using risk theory and vehicle dynamics. Sci Eng Ethics 26:1–19

  Google Scholar 

• Edmonds D (2014) Would you kill the fat man? The trolley problem and what your answer tells us about right and wrong. Princeton University Press, Princeton

  Google Scholar 

• Faulhaber AK, Dittmer A, Blind F, Wächter MA, Timm S, Sütfeld LR, König P (2019) Human decisions in moral dilemmas are largely described by utilitarianism: virtual car driving study provides guidelines for autonomous driving vehicles. Sci Eng Ethics 25(2):399–418

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Fayyad J, Jaradat MA, Gruyer D, Najjaran H (2020) Deep learning sensor fusion for autonomous vehicle perception and localization: a review. Sensors 20(15):4220

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Foot P (1967) The problem of abortion. Oxford Rev 5:5–15

  Google Scholar 

• Frank DA, Chrysochou P, Mitkidis P, Ariely D (2019) Human decision-making biases in the moral dilemmas of autonomous vehicles. Sci Rep 9(1):1–19

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Gold N, Pulford BD, Colman AM (2014) The outlandish, the realistic, and the real: contextual manipulation and agent role effects in trolley problems. Front Psychol 5:35

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Grasso GM, Lucifora C, Perconti P, Plebe A (2020) Integrating human acceptable morality in autonomous vehicles. In: Ahram T, Karwowski W, Vergnano A, Leali F, Taiar R (eds) Intelligent human systems integration 2020. IHSI 2020. Advances in intelligent systems and computing. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39512-4_7

  Chapter  Google Scholar 

• Greene JD, Sommerville RB, Nystrom LE, Darley JM, Cohen JD (2001) fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science 293:2105–2108

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Greene JD, Nystrom LE, Engell AD, Darley JM, Cohen JD (2004) The neural bases of cognitive conflict and control in moral judgment. Neuron 44(2):389–400

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Gross D, Ehlers W, Wriggers P, Schröder J, Müller R (2017) Statics-formulas and problems. Springer, Berlin

  Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

• Hansson SO (2012) A panorama of the philosophy of risk. In Handbook of risk theory. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 27–54

• Himmelreich J (2018) Never mind the trolley: The ethics of autonomous vehicles in mundane situations. In: «Ethical Theory & Moral Practice» vol. XXI, n. 3:669–684

• Jorge CC, Rossetti RJF (2018) On social interactions and the emergence of autonomous vehicles. In International conference on vehicle technology and intelligent transport systems (pp. 423–430)

• Kagan S (1989) The limits of morality

• Kahneman D (2011) Thinking, fast and slow, Macmillan, Basingstoke

• Kallioinen N, Pershina M, Zeiser J, Nosrat Nezami F, Pipa G, Stephan A, König P (2019) Moral judgements on the actions of self-driving carsand human drivers in dilemma situations from different perspectives. Front Psychol 10:2415

• Kant I (1785) The categorical imperative

• Keeling G (2020) Why trolley problems mater for the ethics of automated vehicles. In: «Science and Engineering Ethics», vol. XXVI, n. 1:293–307

• Kastrinaki V, Zervakis M, Kalaitzakis K (2003) A survey of video processing techniques for traffic applications. Image Vis Comput 21:359–381

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Koenings M, Young L, Adolphs R, Tranel D, Cushman F, Hauser M, Damasio A (2007) Damage to the prefrontal cortex increases utilitarian moral judgments. Nature 446:908–911

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Kuutti S, Fallah S, Bowden R, Barber P (2019) Deep learning for autonomous vehicle control—algorithms, state-of-the-art, and future prospects. Synth Lect Adv Automot Technol 3:1–80

  Google Scholar 

• LaViola JJ Jr (2000) A discussion of cybersickness in virtual environments. ACM Sigchi Bull 32(1):47–56

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Li S, Zhang J, Li P, Wang Y, Wang Q (2019) Influencing factors of driving decision-making under the moral dilemma. IEEE Access 7:104132–104142

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Lieberman MD (2007) Social cognitive neuroscience: a review of core processes. Annu Rev Psychol 58:259–289

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Lucifora C, Grasso GM, Perconti P, Plebe A (2020) Moral dilemmas in self-driving cars. Rivista internazionale di Filosofia e Psicologia 11(2):238–250

  Google Scholar 

• Marchand R (1992) The designer go to the fair II: Norman Bel Geddes, the general motors “futurama” and the visit to the factory transformed. Design Issues 8(2):23–40

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Masaki I (ed) (1992) Vision-based vehicle guidance. Springer-Verlag, Berlin

  MATH  Google Scholar 

• McCall JC, Trivedi MM (2006) Video-based lane estimation and tracking for driver assistance: survey, system, and evaluation. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst 7:20–37

  Article  Google Scholar 

• McCubbins MD, Turner M (2012) Going cognitive: tools for rebuilding the social sciences. In: Sun R (ed) Grounding social sciences in cognitive sciences. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 387–414

  Google Scholar 

• Meder B, Fleischhut N, Krumnau NC, Waldmann MR (2019) How should autonomous cars drive? A preference for defaults in moral judgments under risk and uncertainty. Risk Anal 39(2):295–314

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Mikhail J (2007) Universal moral grammar: theory, evidence and the future. Trends Cogn Sci 11:143–152

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Nyholm S, Smids J (2016) The ethics of accident-algorithms for self-driving cars: An applied trolley problem?. In: «Ethical Theory & Moral Practice» vol. XIX, n. 5:1275–1289

• Ohn-Bar E, Trivedi MM (2016) Looking at humans in the age of self-driving and highly automated vehicles. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst 29:90–104

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Patil I, Cogoni C, Zangrando N, Chittaro L, Silani G (2014) Affective basis of judgment-behavior discrepancy in virtual experiences of moral dilemmas. Soc Neurosci 9(1):94–107

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Pomerleau, D. A. (1989). ALVINN: An autonomous land vehicle in a neural network. In Ieee intelligent vehicles symposium (pp. 305–313)

• Rhim J, Lee GB, Lee JH (2020) Human moral reasoning types in autonomous vehicle moral dilemma: a cross-cultural comparison of Korea andCanada. Comput Hum Behav 102:39–56

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Riaz F, Niazi M (2017) Towards social autonomous vehicles: efficient collision avoidance scheme using Richardson’s arms race model. PLoS ONE 12:e0186103

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Richards DC (2010) Relationship between speed and risk of fatal injury: pedestrians and car occupants. Department for Transport, London

  Google Scholar 

• Rumiati RI, Humphreys GW (2015) Cognitive neuroscience goes social. Cortex 70:1–4

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Samuel S, Yahoodik S, Yamani Y, Valluru K, Fisher DL (2020) Ethical decision making behind the wheel–a driving simulator study. Transport Res Interdisip Perspect 5:100147

  Google Scholar 

• Schwarting W, Pierson A, Alonso-Mora J, Karaman S, Rus D (2019) Social behavior for autonomous vehicles. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 116:24972–24978

  Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

• Stanovich KE, West RF (2000) Individual differences in reasoning: implications for the rationality debate? Behav Brain Sci 23:645–726

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Thomson JJ (1976) Killing, let die, and the trolley problem. Monist An Int Quart J General Philisophical Inquiry 59:204–217

  Google Scholar 

• Thomson JJ (1985) The trolley problem. Yale Law J 94:1395–1415

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Turner M (2001) Cognitive dimensions of social science. Oxford University Press, Oxford

  Google Scholar 

• Vanderhaegen F (2016) A rule-based support system for dissonance discovery and control applied to car driving. Expert Syst Appl 65:361–371

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Vanderhaegen F (2021) Weak signal-oriented investigation of ethical dissonance applied to unsuccessful mobility experiences linked to human-machine interactions. Sci Eng Ethics 27(1):1–25

  Article  Google Scholar 

• VanRullen R (2017) Perception science in the age of deep neural networks. Front Psychol 8:142

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Winfield AF, Blum C, Liu W (2014) Towards an ethical robot: internal models, consequences and ethical action selection. In: Mistry M, Leonardis A, Witkowski M, Melhuish C (eds) Advances in autonomous robotic systems, TAROS 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Cham, pp. 85–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10401-08

• Wilson H, Theodorou A, Bryson JJ (2019). Slam the Brakes: Perceptions of Moral Decisions in Driving Dilemmas. In AISafety@ IJCAI

• Wood A (2013) Humanity as end in itself. In: Scheffler S (ed) On what matters, vol 2. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 58–82

  Google Scholar 

• Yokoi R, Nakayachi K (2020) Trust in autonomous cars: exploring the role of shared moral values, reasoning, and emotion in safety-critical decisions. Hum Factors. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720820933041

  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references