Plus Ça Change, Plus C'est la Même Chose: Legal and Ethical Issues in the Practice of Psychology

1991 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-44
Author(s):  
Solomon M. Fulero
Author(s):  
Tripat Gill

AbstractThe ethical dilemma (ED) of whether autonomous vehicles (AVs) should protect the passengers or pedestrians when harm is unavoidable has been widely researched and debated. Several behavioral scientists have sought public opinion on this issue, based on the premise that EDs are critical to resolve for AV adoption. However, many scholars and industry participants have downplayed the importance of these edge cases. Policy makers also advocate a focus on higher level ethical principles rather than on a specific solution to EDs. But conspicuously absent from this debate is the view of the consumers or potential adopters, who will be instrumental to the success of AVs. The current research investigated this issue both from a theoretical standpoint and through empirical research. The literature on innovation adoption and risk perception suggests that EDs will be heavily weighted by potential adopters of AVs. Two studies conducted with a broad sample of consumers verified this assertion. The results from these studies showed that people associated EDs with the highest risk and considered EDs as the most important issue to address as compared to the other technical, legal and ethical issues facing AVs. As such, EDs need to be addressed to ensure robustness in the design of AVs and to assure consumers of the safety of this promising technology. Some preliminary evidence is provided about interventions to resolve the social dilemma in EDs and about the ethical preferences of prospective early adopters of AVs.


2000 ◽  
Vol 15 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 125-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven G. Little ◽  
K. Angeleque Akin Little

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 1-131
Author(s):  
Mariano J. Aznar

Abstract Among other circumstances relevant to maritime delimitations, some States have recently used the protection of underwater cultural heritage (UCH) as grounds for advancing jurisdictional or sovereignty claims over different maritime areas. After identifying the contours of current international law governing that heritage, this book critically addresses: first, the generally limited use of archaeological heritage in territorial claims; second, the broad acceptance by States of ‘archaeological maritime zones’ that overlap with declared contiguous zones; and, third, the (mis)use of UCH and underwater archaeology in three still disputed maritime claims, namely, Canada’s claim in Arctic waters, China’s in the South China Sea, and Russia’s in Crimea and its surrounding waters. Legal and ethical issues related to underwater archaeology are also discussed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document