Protyre News

In research conducted by Confused.com the general public were given the chance to ‘programme’ an autonomous car  in a simulation giving them the power to make decisions based on the scenario.
 
Results form the data collected from the experiment allows us to view what the driving population think autonomous vehicles should do when acting on their behalf. Based on majority responses across different scenarios, overall drivers felt autonomous vehicles should be programmed in the following way:

• Prioritise pedestrians over occupants (58% vs 27%).

• Take a neutral position on the number of lives saved (46%).

• Protect humans over dogs (84% vs 16%).

• Protect children (59%) over the elderly (9%).

The experiment forms part of a new expert report into autonomous vehicles following the royal assent of the Automated and Electric Vehicles Act 2018. The report provides clarity on a range of confusing questions about driverless vehicles, for example, whether the UK Government’s ambition to have autonomous vehicles on our roads by 2021 is unrealistic.
 
The report also discusses some of the transitional challenges associated with autonomous vehicles, such as improvements to road markings in order for the optical sensing technology of AVs to be able to work effectively and the potential impact on road safety if vehicles with varying levels of autonomy are on the road at the same time.

It’s clear from the above findings that not all drivers have the same opinion when it comes to how to autonomous vehicles should prioritise protection.
 
Sample of driver-decisions for scenarios in The Conscious Car simulation

While both men and women were most likely to programme the vehicle to protect pedestrians (see table below), women were more likely to make this empathetic decision than men. While men had an increased tendency to save the occupant of the car. Women were also more likely than men to programme the car to protect multiple people and dogs. However, men were more inclined to make decisions to protect the elderly than women.
 
Comparison of programming decision weighting between men and women:
Most likely to protect…

There was also variation in the programming decisions made depending on the age of the programmer. When compared to other age groups, younger drivers (18-24) were more likely to take a liberal stance and programme their vehicle to protect pedestrians and many individuals over the few. While older drivers, particularly those aged between 45-54, were more likely to protect the occupant of the car. Younger drivers were also more likely to have a soft-spot for animals and programme their vehicle to protect dogs, compared to other demographics. While drivers over the age of 55+ were least likely to choose to protect the elderly, in what some might describe as a selfless act.
 
Comparison of programming decision weighting between age groups:
Most likely to protect…

Amanda Stretton, motoring editor at Confused.com, says:
“Our report makes it clear society needs to have some serious debates before driverless technology is introduced to our roads. The decisions driverless vehicles make will ultimately be decided by humans at the programming stage, so it’s important to start having conversations about how we want this technology to think and operate. Drivers who want to see where they stand compared to the rest of the UK can try programming an autonomous vehicle using our Conscious Car simulation.”
 

However autonomous, your car is they will always need tyres! Find your perfect pair today using our handy widget below: