Regional differences in public perceptions of autonomous vehicles facing moral dilemmas: A comparative study between the United States, Hong Kong, and China

Ki Joon Kim, Sai Wang*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Journal Publications and ReviewsRGC 21 - Publication in refereed journalpeer-review

Abstract

In an online experiment, 1,500 adult residents from the United States, Hong Kong, and China were exposed to four variations of a dilemma that required a driver in an autonomous vehicle or the vehicle itself to make a passenger-protective (i.e., protecting the vehicle passenger by sacrificing a pedestrian) or a pedestrian-protective (i.e., protecting a pedestrian by sacrificing the vehicle passenger) moral decision. The results indicated that the types of moral dilemmas and moral decision-makers had no significant effects on ethical judgment and attitudes toward autonomous vehicles as well as purchase intentions, perceived intelligence, and safety. However, regional differences played a key role in influencing these measured variables. Additionally, the varying levels of collectivism in the three regions emerged as a potential underlying mechanism to explain the regional differences. © The Author(s)
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1369–1377
Number of pages9
JournalUniversal Access in the Information Society
Volume24
Issue number2
Online published20 Aug 2024
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2025

Funding

This work was supported by the General Research Fund from the Research Grants Council of Hong Kong (No. 11605020).

Research Keywords

  • Autonomous vehicle
  • Moral dilemma
  • Ethical judgment
  • Regional difference
  • Collectivism

RGC Funding Information

  • RGC-funded

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Regional differences in public perceptions of autonomous vehicles facing moral dilemmas: A comparative study between the United States, Hong Kong, and China'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this