A massive new survey developed by MIT researchers reveals some distinct global preferences concerning the ethics of autonomous vehicles, as well as some regional variations in those preferences.
The survey has global reach and a unique scale, with over 2 million online participants from over 200 countries weighing in on versions of a classic ethical conundrum, the “Trolley Problem.” The problem involves scenarios in which an accident involving a vehicle is imminent, and the vehicle must opt for one of two potentially fatal options. In the case of driverless cars, that might mean swerving toward a couple of people, rather than a large group of bystanders.
“The study is basically trying to understand the kinds of moral decisions that driverless cars might have to resort to,” says Edmond Awad, a postdoc at the MIT Media Lab and lead author of a new paper outlining the results of the project. “We don’t know yet how they should do that.”
Still, Awad adds, “We found that there are three elements that people seem to approve of the most.”
Indeed, the most emphatic global preferences in the survey are for sparing the lives of humans over the lives of other animals; sparing the lives of many people rather than a few; and preserving the lives of the young, rather than older people.
“The main preferences were to some degree universally agreed upon,” Awad notes. “But the degree to which they agree with this or not varies among different groups or countries.” For instance, the researchers found a less pronounced tendency to favor younger people, rather than the elderly, in what they defined as an “eastern” cluster of countries, including many in Asia.
The paper, “The Moral Machine Experiment,” is being published today in Nature.
The authors are Awad; Sohan Dsouza, a doctoral student in the Media Lab; Richard Kim, a research assistant in the Media Lab; Jonathan Schulz, a postdoc at Harvard University; Joseph Henrich, a professor at Harvard; Azim Shariff, an associate professor at the University of British Columbia; Jean-François Bonnefon, a professor at the Toulouse School of Economics; and Iyad Rahwan, an associate professor of media arts and sciences at the Media Lab, and a faculty affiliate in the MIT Institute for Data, Systems, and Society.
Awad is a postdoc in the MIT Media Lab’s Scalable Cooperation group, which is led by Rahwan.
To conduct the survey, the researchers designed what they call “Moral Machine,” a multilingual online game in which participants could state their preferences concerning a series of dilemmas that autonomous vehicles might face. For instance: If it comes right down it, should autonomous vehicles spare the lives of law-abiding bystanders, or, alternately, law-breaking pedestrians who might be jaywalking? (Most people in the survey opted for the former.)
All told, “Moral Machine” compiled nearly 40 million individual decisions from respondents in 233 countries; the survey collected 100 or more responses from 130 countries. The researchers analyzed the data as a whole, while also breaking participants into subgroups defined by age, education, gender, income, and political and religious views. There were 491,921 respondents who offered demographic data.
The scholars did not find marked differences in moral preferences based on these demographic characteristics, but they did find larger “clusters” of moral preferences based on cultural and geographic affiliations. They defined “western,” “eastern,” and “southern” clusters of countries, and found some more pronounced variations along these lines. For instance: Respondents in southern countries had a relatively stronger tendency to favor sparing young people rather than the elderly, especially compared to the eastern cluster.
Awad suggests that acknowledgement of these types of preferences should be a basic part of informing public-sphere discussion of these issues. In all regions, since there is a moderate preference for sparing law-abiding bystanders rather than jaywalkers, knowing these preferences could, in theory, inform the way software is written to control autonomous vehicles.
“The question is whether these differences in preferences will matter in terms of people’s adoption of the new technology when [vehicles] employ a specific rule,” he says.
Rahwan, for his part, notes that “public interest in the platform surpassed our wildest expectations,” allowing the researchers to conduct a survey that raised awareness about automation and ethics while also yielding specific public-opinion information.
“On the one hand, we wanted to provide a simple way for the public to engage in an important societal discussion,” Rahwan says. “On the other hand, we wanted to collect data to identify which factors people think are important for autonomous cars to use in resolving ethical tradeoffs.”
Beyond the results of the survey, Awad suggests, seeking public input about an issue of innovation and public safety should continue to become a larger part of the dialoge surrounding autonomous vehicles.
“What we have tried to do in this project, and what I would hope becomes more common, is to create public engagement in these sorts of decisions,” Awad says.
Learn more: How should autonomous vehicles be programmed?
The Latest on: Ethics of autonomous vehicles
via Google News
The Latest on: Ethics of autonomous vehicles
- What People Really Think of Autonomous Carson August 15, 2019 at 9:00 am
This thought experiment, when transferred to autonomous cars, raises a chain of further ... Moreover, 65% of male participants didn’t believe the cars could be “taught” ethics whereas the women were ...
- If your self-driving car had to choose whom to hit: Ethics questions stump AIon August 2, 2019 at 8:11 am
Besides privacy issues, questions about autonomous AI are getting hairier with the approach self-driving cars, Madnick pointed out. At MIT, Madnick teaches students about technology ethics.
- Should autonomous vehicles be programmed to break the law?on August 1, 2019 at 5:00 pm
As autonomous vehicles pull out onto the roads in greater numbers, issues of safety and morality will inevitably be raised. Extreme ethical scenarios are being considered, like deciding whether a car ...
- Ethics dilemmas may hold back autonomous cars: studyon July 31, 2019 at 5:00 pm
Washington (AFP) - If it has to make a choice, will your autonomous car kill you or pedestrians on the street? The looming arrival of self-driving vehicles is likely to vastly reduce traffic ...
- Intel Targets Autonomous Cars and IoT With New Acquisitionon July 27, 2019 at 11:55 pm
The idea is to allow these autonomous vehicles to collect visual information and make decision on how to act based on that information. While this may seem like a great advance in technology, it does ...
- Ethics in the age of autonomous vehicleson July 26, 2019 at 3:56 pm
Earlier this month, TechCrunch held its inaugural Mobility Sessions event, where leading mobility-focused auto companies, startups, executives and thought leaders joined us to discuss all things ...
- Could a Morality Setting Be the Future of Autonomous Vehicles?on July 17, 2019 at 4:16 pm
Humans can make a decision in that split second that is reflective of their personal code of ethics. But what happens when they're riding in an autonomous vehicle and are not in control of the car?
- Is your autonomous vehicle Sally the sports car or blood-thirsty Christine?on May 28, 2019 at 2:01 pm
The “autonomous vehicle paradox” of inducing drivers to disconnect because ... accept responsibility for the consequences if it is not. What about the ethics of the AI programming or training? The ...
- Why Ethics Are Paramount For Autonomous Vehicleson March 27, 2019 at 10:22 am
hilosophy professor Nick Evans, winner of a 2017 National Science Foundation grant to study the ethical questions that autonomous vehicles raise, discusses the critical and sometimes excruciating life ...
via Bing News