AI Chat Paper
Discover the SciOpen Platform and Achieve Your Research Goals with Ease.
Search articles, authors, keywords, DOl and etc.
{{expandStatus?'Exit ':''}}Advanced Search
Autonomous machines (AMs) are poised to possess human-like moral cognition, yet their morality is often pre-programmed for safety. This raises the question of whether the morality intended by programmers aligns with their actions during actual operation, a crucial consideration for a future society with both humans and AMs. Investigating this, we use a micro-robot swarm in a simulated fire scenario, with 180 participants, including 102 robot programmers, completing moral questionnaires and participating in virtual escape trials. These exercises mirror common societal moral dilemmas. Our comparative analysis reveals a “morality gap” between programming presets and real-time operation, primarily influenced by uncertainty about the future and heightened by external pressures, especially social punishment. This discrepancy suggests that operational morality can diverge from programmed intentions, underlining the need for careful AM design to foster a collaborative and efficient society.
M. M. Waldrop, Autonomous vehicles: No drivers required, Nature, vol. 518, no. 7537, pp. 20–23, 2015.
D. Floreano and R. J. Wood, Science, technology and the future of small autonomous drones, Nature, vol. 521, no. 7553, pp. 460–466, 2015.
R. Stone and M. Lavine, The social life of robots, Science, vol. 346, no. 6206, pp. 178–179, 2014.
M. Wu, N. Wang, and K. F. Yuen, Deep versus superficial anthropomorphism: Exploring their effects on human trust in shared autonomous vehicles, Comput. Human Behav., vol. 141, p. 107614, 2023.
E. C. Ferrer, T. Hardjono, A. Pentland, and M. Dorigo, Secure and secret cooperation in robot swarms, Sci. Robot., vol. 6, no. 56, p. eabf1538, 2021.
M. S. Talamali, A. Saha, J. A. R. Marshall, and A. Reina, When less is more: Robot swarms adapt better to changes with constrained communication, Sci. Robot., vol. 6, no. 56, p. eabf1416, 2021.
J. G. Lee and K. M. Lee, Polite speech strategies and their impact on drivers’ trust in autonomous vehicles, Comput. Human Behav., vol. 127, p. 107015, 2022.
P. Polak, C. Nelischer, H. Guo, and D. C. Robertson, “Intelligent” finance and treasury management: What we can expect, AI Soc., vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 715–726, 2020.
C. M. de Melo, S. Marsella, and J. Gratch, Social decisions and fairness change when people’s interests are represented by autonomous agents, Auton. Agent. Multi Agent Syst., vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 163–187, 2018.
C. M. de Melo, S. Marsella, and J. Gratch, Human cooperation when acting through autonomous machines, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, vol. 116, no. 9, pp. 3482–3487, 2019.
E. Awad, S. Dsouza, R. Kim, J. Schulz, J. Henrich, A. Shariff, J. F. Bonnefon, and I. Rahwan, The moral machine experiment, Nature, vol. 563, no. 7729, pp. 59–64, 2018.
P. Bello and S. Bringsjord, On how to build a moral machine, Topoi, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 251–266, 2013.
W. Schwarting, A. Pierson, J. Alonso-Mora, S. Karaman, and D. Rus, Social behavior for autonomous vehicles, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, vol. 116, no. 50, pp. 24972–24978, 2019.
J. F. Bonnefon, A. Shariff, and I. Rahwan, The social dilemma of autonomous vehicles, Science, vol. 352, no. 6293, pp. 1573–1576, 2016.
M. Moussaïd and M. Trauernicht, Patterns of cooperation during collective emergencies in the help-or-escape social dilemma, Sci. Rep., vol. 6, no. 1, p. 33417, 2016.
S. Nichols and R. Mallon, Moral dilemmas and moral rules, Cognition, vol. 100, no. 3, pp. 530–542, 2006.
C. G. McClintock and S. T. Allison, Social value orientation and helping behavior, J. Appl. Soc. Psychol., vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 353–362, 1989.
L. J. Cronbach, Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests, Psychometrika, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 297–334, 1951.
J. Cameron, K. M. Banko, and W. D. Pierce, Pervasive negative effects of rewards on intrinsic motivation: The myth continues, Behav. Anal., vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 1–44, 2001.
R. L. Capa and C. A. Bouquet, Individual differences in reward sensitivity modulate the distinctive effects of conscious and unconscious rewards on executive performance, Front. Psychol., vol. 9, p. 148, 2018.
R. O. Murphy, K. A. Ackermann, and M. J. J. Handgraaf, Measuring social value orientation, Judgm. Decis. Mak., vol. 6, no. 8, pp. 771–781, 2011.
B. Simpson, Sex, fear, and greed: A social dilemma analysis of gender and cooperation, Soc. Forces, vol. 82, no. 1, pp. 35–52, 2003.
M. Van Vugt, D. de Cremer, and D. P. Janssen, Gender differences in cooperation and competition: The male-warrior hypothesis, Psychol. Sci., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 19–23, 2007.
U. Fischbacher, S. Gächter, and E. Fehr, Are people conditionally cooperative? Evidence from a public goods experiment, Econ. Lett., vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 397–404, 2001.
J. Grujić, C. Fosco, L. Araujo, J. A. Cuesta, and A. Sánchez, Social experiments in the mesoscale: Humans playing a spatial Prisoner’s Dilemma, PLoS One, vol. 5, no. 11, p. e13749, 2010.
W. Güth and R. Tietz, Ultimatum bargaining behavior: A survey and comparison of experimental results, J. Econ. Psychol., vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 417–449, 1990.
H. Oosterbeek, R. Sloof, and G. Van De Kuilen, Cultural differences in ultimatum game experiments: Evidence from a meta-analysis, Exp. Econ., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 171–188, 2004.
H. Rauhut and F. Winter, A sociological perspective on measuring social norms by means of strategy method experiments, Soc. Sci. Res., vol. 39, no. 6, pp. 1181–1194, 2010.
K. Fujita, Y. Trope, N. Liberman, and M. Levin-Sagi, Construal levels and self-control, J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., vol. 90, no. 3, pp. 351–367, 2006.
J. Agerström and F. Björklund, Temporal distance and moral concerns: Future morally questionable behavior is perceived as more wrong and evokes stronger prosocial intentions, Basic Appl. Soc. Psych., vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 49–59, 2009.
J. Agerström and F. Björklund, Moral concerns are greater for temporally distant events and are moderated by value strength, Soc. Cogn., vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 261–282, 2009.
C. K. W. De Dreu, M. Giacomantonio, S. Shalvi, and D. Sligte, Getting stuck or stepping back: Effects of obstacles and construal level in the negotiation of creative solutions, J. Exp. Soc. Psychol., vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 542–548, 2009.
V. Liberman, S. M. Samuels, and L. Ross, The name of the game: Predictive power of reputations versus situational labels in determining Prisoner’s Dilemma game moves, Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull., vol. 30, no. 9, pp. 1175–1185, 2004.
D. G. Pruitt, Motivational processes in the decomposed Prisoner’s Dilemma game, J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 227–238, 1970.
E. Fehr and S. Gächter, Cooperation and punishment in public goods experiments, Am. Econ. Rev., vol. 90, no. 4, pp. 980–994, 2000.
L. Molleman, F. Kölle, C. Starmer, and S. Gächter, People prefer coordinated punishment in cooperative interactions, Nat. Hum. Behav., vol. 3, no. 11, pp. 1145–1153, 2019.
The articles published in this open access journal are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
京公网安备11010802044758号