Abstract
ABSTRACT This study conducted an experiment to test how the level of blame differs between an artificial intelligence (AI) and a human driver based on attribution theory and computers are social actors (CASA). It used a 2 (human vs. AI driver) x 2 (victim survived vs. victim died) x 2 (female vs. male driver) design. After reading a given scenario, participants (N = 284) were asked to assign a level of responsibility to the driver. The participants blamed drivers more when the driver was AI compared to when the driver was a human. Also, the higher level of blame was shown when the result was more severe. However, gender bias was found not to be significant when faulting drivers. These results indicate that the intention of blaming AI comes from the perception of dissimilarity and the seriousness of outcomes influences the level of blame. Implications of findings for applications and theory are discussed.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
