Reasons and principles for automated vehicle decisions in ethically ambiguous everyday scenarios: The case of cyclist overtaking

Automated vehicles (AVs) consistently encounter ethically ambiguous situations in everyday driving, scenarios involving conflicting human interests and no clearly optimal course of action. While existing work often focuses on rare, high-stakes dilemmas (e.g., crash avoidance or trolley problems), routine decisions such as overtaking cyclists or navigating social interactions remain underexplored. This study addresses that gap by applying the tracking condition of Meaningful Human Control (MHC), which holds that AV behaviour should align with human reasons—the values, intentions, or expectations that justify actions. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 18 AV experts, who explained the reasons behind the considerations AV should make when planning a manoeuvre. Thirteen reason categories emerged, organised across normative, strategic, tactical, and operational levels. Using a case study on cyclist overtaking, we demonstrate how these reasons interact in practice and expose tensions in the decision-making process. Building on this analysis, we derive a reason-prioritisation principle grounded in the cyclist-overtaking scenario for AV behaviour in ethically ambiguous routine situations: prioritising vulnerable road users’ safety above all, treating systemic safety and regulation as important but conditional, and permitting secondary values only when safety is not compromised. This hierarchy supports human-aligned behaviour by allowing pragmatic actions when strict legal compliance would undermine higher-priority values. Our findings offer conceptual principles intended to inform future research and design for AV decision-making in ethically challenging routine situations. • Automated vehicles face ethically ambiguous everyday situations without clear optima. • Interviews with 18 AV experts identified thirteen relevant reasons for manoeuvre planning. • A cyclist-overtaking case revealed tensions between safety, efficiency, and rule compliance. • Case analysis yielded a principle for prioritising reasons in routine driving.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives
Published
2025-12-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2025.101787
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.44
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reasons and principles for automated vehicle decisions in ethically ambiguous everyday scenarios: The case of cyclist overtaking

1 citations
Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
2.44
article

Reasons and principles for automated vehicle decisions in ethically ambiguous everyday scenarios: The case of cyclist overtaking

article en
1 citations

Abstract

Automated vehicles (AVs) consistently encounter ethically ambiguous situations in everyday driving, scenarios involving conflicting human interests and no clearly optimal course of action. While existing work often focuses on rare, high-stakes dilemmas (e.g., crash avoidance or trolley problems), routine decisions such as overtaking cyclists or navigating social interactions remain underexplored. This study addresses that gap by applying the tracking condition of Meaningful Human Control (MHC), which holds that AV behaviour should align with human reasons—the values, intentions, or expectations that justify actions. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 18 AV experts, who explained the reasons behind the considerations AV should make when planning a manoeuvre. Thirteen reason categories emerged, organised across normative, strategic, tactical, and operational levels. Using a case study on cyclist overtaking, we demonstrate how these reasons interact in practice and expose tensions in the decision-making process. Building on this analysis, we derive a reason-prioritisation principle grounded in the cyclist-overtaking scenario for AV behaviour in ethically ambiguous routine situations: prioritising vulnerable road users’ safety above all, treating systemic safety and regulation as important but conditional, and permitting secondary values only when safety is not compromised. This hierarchy supports human-aligned behaviour by allowing pragmatic actions when strict legal compliance would undermine higher-priority values. Our findings offer conceptual principles intended to inform future research and design for AV decision-making in ethically challenging routine situations. • Automated vehicles face ethically ambiguous everyday situations without clear optima. • Interviews with 18 AV experts identified thirteen relevant reasons for manoeuvre planning. • A cyclist-overtaking case revealed tensions between safety, efficiency, and rule compliance. • Case analysis yielded a principle for prioritising reasons in routine driving.

Transportation Research Interdisciplinary PerspectivesVol. 35
Delft University of Technology (NL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
2.44
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.