33
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      To Brake or Not to Brake? Personality Traits Predict Decision-Making in an Accident Situation

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Many situations require decisions to be made in very little time—in emergency or accident situations such decisions will carry potentially harmful consequences. Can we predict how people react in such situations from their personality traits alone? Since experimental tests of accident situations are not possible in the real world, existing studies usually employ text-based surveys or post-situation assessments, making predictions and generalization difficult. In the present study, we used virtual reality to create a more life-like situation in order to study decision-making under controlled circumstances. In our experiment, participants trained in an immersive car simulation to complete a race-course as fast as possible. In the testing phase, pedestrians appeared on the course without warning, forcing participants to react. The experiment used a one-shot design to avoid pre-meditation and to test naïve, rapid decision-making. Participants' reactions could be classified into two categories: people who tried to brake, and people who potentially endangered pedestrians by not braking or conducting hazardous evasion maneuvers. Importantly, this latter group of participants scored significantly higher on psychopathy-related traits among a set of personality-related factors. Additional personality factors, as well as age, gender, gaming expertise, and driving experience did not significantly influence participants' decision-making. This result was true for both a Korean sample ( N = 94) and an independently-tested German sample ( N = 94), indicating cross-cultural stability of the results. Overall, our results demonstrate that decision-making in an extreme, simulated accident situation is critically influenced by personality traits.

          Related collections

          Most cited references65

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Psychopathy as a clinical and empirical construct.

          In this review, we focus on two major influences on current conceptualizations of psychopathy: one clinical, with its origins largely in the early case studies of Cleckley, and the other empirical, the result of widespread use of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) for assessment purposes. Some investigators assert that the PCL-R, ostensibly based on Cleckley's work, has "drifted" from the construct described in his Clinical Profile. We evaluate this profile, note its basis in an unrepresentative sample of patients, and suggest that its literal and uncritical acceptance by the research community has become problematical. We also argue that the idea of construct "drift" is irrelevant to current conceptualizations of psychopathy, which are better informed by the extensive empirical research on the integration of structural, genetic, developmental, personality, and neurobiological research findings than by rigid adherence to early clinical formulations. We offer some suggestions for future research on psychopathy.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The role of conscious reasoning and intuition in moral judgment: testing three principles of harm.

            Is moral judgment accomplished by intuition or conscious reasoning? An answer demands a detailed account of the moral principles in question. We investigated three principles that guide moral judgments: (a) Harm caused by action is worse than harm caused by omission, (b) harm intended as the means to a goal is worse than harm foreseen as the side effect of a goal, and (c) harm involving physical contact with the victim is worse than harm involving no physical contact. Asking whether these principles are invoked to explain moral judgments, we found that subjects generally appealed to the first and third principles in their justifications, but not to the second. This finding has significance for methods and theories of moral psychology: The moral principles used in judgment must be directly compared with those articulated in justification, and doing so shows that some moral principles are available to conscious reasoning whereas others are not.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The social dilemma of autonomous vehicles

              Autonomous vehicles (AVs) should reduce traffic accidents, but they will sometimes have to choose between two evils, such as running over pedestrians or sacrificing themselves and their passenger to save the pedestrians. Defining the algorithms that will help AVs make these moral decisions is a formidable challenge. We found that participants in six Amazon Mechanical Turk studies approved of utilitarian AVs (that is, AVs that sacrifice their passengers for the greater good) and would like others to buy them, but they would themselves prefer to ride in AVs that protect their passengers at all costs. The study participants disapprove of enforcing utilitarian regulations for AVs and would be less willing to buy such an AV. Accordingly, regulating for utilitarian algorithms may paradoxically increase casualties by postponing the adoption of a safer technology.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Psychol
                Front Psychol
                Front. Psychol.
                Frontiers in Psychology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-1078
                05 February 2019
                2019
                : 10
                : 134
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Department of Brain and Cognitive Engineering, Cognitive Systems Lab, Korea University , Seoul, South Korea
                [2] 2Department of Biomedical Science, Interdisciplinary Affective Neuroscience Lab, Korea University , Seoul, South Korea
                [3] 3Empathy Research Institute , Goyang, South Korea
                Author notes

                Edited by: Eva G. Krumhuber, University College London, United Kingdom

                Reviewed by: Christos Mousas, Purdue University, United States; Pierre Bourdin, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Spain

                *Correspondence: Christian Wallraven wallraven@ 123456korea.ac.kr

                This article was submitted to Personality and Social Psychology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology

                Article
                10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00134
                6370639
                30804837
                7a36ccc4-cd36-4d05-a015-64eb5876be19
                Copyright © 2019 Ju, Kang and Wallraven.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 11 September 2018
                : 15 January 2019
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 3, Equations: 0, References: 83, Pages: 11, Words: 9331
                Categories
                Psychology
                Original Research

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                virtual reality,decision-making,accident situation,personality,psychopathy,driving

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content211

                Cited by12

                Most referenced authors972