4.4 Article

Who is to blame for crashes involving autonomous vehicles? Exploring blame attribution across the road transport system

期刊

ERGONOMICS
卷 63, 期 5, 页码 525-537

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/00140139.2020.1744064

关键词

Road crashes; autonomous vehicles; blame attribution; liability; self-driving cars

资金

  1. Australian Research Council (ARC) [DE180101449]
  2. ARC Discovery Early Career Research Award [DE180101411]
  3. ARC Future Fellowship [FT140100681]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The introduction of fully autonomous vehicles is approaching. This warrants a re-consideration of road crash liability, given drivers will have diminished control. This study, underpinned by attribution theory, investigated blame attribution to different road transport system actors following crashes involving manually driven, semi-autonomous and fully autonomous vehicles. It also examined whether outcome severity alters blame ratings. 396 participants attributed blame to five actors (vehicle driver/user, pedestrian, vehicle, manufacturer, government) in vehicle-pedestrian crash scenarios. Different and unique patterns of blame were found across actors, according to the three vehicle types. In crashes involving fully autonomous vehicles, vehicle users received low blame, while vehicle manufacturers and government were highly blamed. There was no difference in the level of blame attributed between high and low severity crashes regarding vehicle type. However, the government received more blame in high severity crashes. The findings have implications for policy and legislation surrounding crash liability. Practitioner summary: Public views relating to blame and liability in transport accidents is a vital consideration for the introduction of new technologies such as autonomous vehicles. This study demonstrates how a systems ergonomics framework can assist to identify the implications of changing public opinion on blame for future road transport systems.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据