Projects per year
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 language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1369–1377 |
| Number of pages | 9 |
| Journal | Universal Access in the Information Society |
| Volume | 24 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| Online published | 20 Aug 2024 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 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.Projects
- 1 Finished
-
GRF: Social Consensus on Ethical Dilemmas of Autonomous Vehicles in Hong Kong: A Comparison with Collectivist and Individualist Cultures
KIM, K. J. (Principal Investigator / Project Coordinator) & Sundar, S. S. (Co-Investigator)
1/09/20 → 22/11/22
Project: Research