Bibliography

Engineering Ethics of Automated Vehicles: Does it Follow Engineering and Federal Protocol?

Borenstein, J., Herkert, JR., & Miller, KW. (2019). Self-driving cars and engineering ethics: The need for a system level analysis. Science and Engineering Ethics, 25(2), 383-398, 10.1007/s11948-017-0006-0

In article, the authors discussed two traffic scenarios that would bring the conversation of self-driving vehicles to a system level analysis. The scenarios are based on how two of the vehicles would react to one another, and the other scenario is how the vehicle would react with pedestrians, motorcycles, regular cars, and animals on roads.  The authors produce possible responses that could be resolutions to some of the key system level issues that need to be resolved with the automation technology. The article is directed towards engineers who could use these possible resolutions to solve the current issues they are having with the self-driving vehicles, so that they are able to produce more of the vehicles in bulk and sell it to the consumer. I will be using the information contained in this article to provide possible solutions to issues with the technology to highlight the development of the vehicles.

Goodall, NJ. (2016). Can you program ethics into a self-driving car? IEEE Spectrum, 53(6), 28-58. 10.1109/MSPEC.2016.7473149

In this article, Goodall asks a valid question of “Why?” when robots (self-driving vehicles) are making decisions when on the road because if an accident occurs with a human driver, their decision is based on instincts, while vehicles aren’t. Goodall discusses the difference between the ethics of robots and humans, on how the technology have to face greater challenges when making decisions when its presented with different situations. The audience of the article is engineers who now must figure out a way to teach/implement elements of good judgement to/into the automation technology, so that the technology can adapt to more situations, and make more ethical decisions. I will be using the data and information stated in the article to explain the difficulties that engineers must go through in order for them to improve the developments of the technology.

Nees, M. (2019). Safer than the average human driver (who is less safe than me)? Examining a popular safety benchmark for self-driving cars. Journal of Safety, 69, 61-68, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2019.02.002

The authors of article used an online sample that examines how U.S. drivers perceive their own driving abilities to drive safely, and their desired level of safety for automated vehicles. This sample was studied because the level of safety of self-driving cars is unclear for human drivers to accept the vehicles on the road. This study is directed towards to help engineers develop an understanding of the desired level of safety that consumers are looking for when purchasing a self-driving vehicle, when riding in a vehicle and driving on the road with a vehicle. The study also helps engineers understand the driving abilities of drivers in the U.S., so that they can implement better driving abilities into the self-driving vehicles. This article will be useful in my paper because the findings in the sample help the public understand the average ratings of drivers, and how engineers will be using the data to improve the technology.

Nyholm, S., & Smids, J. (2016). The ethics of accident-algorithms for self-driving cars: An applied trolley problem? Ethical Theory & Moral Practice, 19(5), 1275-1289. 10.1007/s10677-016-9745-2

The authors of this article identify three significant ways that the ethics of accident-algorithms and the philosophy of the trolley problem differ from each other. In discussing the differences, the authors identified several basic issues and complexities that arise in the ethics of programming self-driving vehicles. Although, collisions are unavoidable, the programming of vehicles should be able to respond to different accident scenarios that may arise. Even though engineers, the target audience, won’t be able to program every collision scenario into the self-driving vehicles, they should address most of the issues and complexities discussed in this article. I will use information presented in the article for my paper to analyze the issues that arise in the programming of the self-driving vehicles.

Vellinga, NE. (2017). From the testing to the deployment of self-driving cars: Legal challenges to policymakers on the road ahead. Computer Law & Security Review, 33(6), 847-863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2017.05.006

In this article, Vellinga discusses the pressing questions that policymakers are faced with concerning the self-driving technology. Due to self-driving cars developing in an outstanding manner, policymakers must confront how to regulate the testing of the vehicles on public roads, how to deal with the absence of a human driver and how does the technology affect liability and insurance. Vellinga is directing this article towards the government, engineers, and insurance companies because all three are faced with “check and balance” situations due to the development of the self-driving vehicles. With all the information given in the article, I will be using it to discuss all the problems that different groups of people face while the self-driving technology is being produced and released to the general public for everyday use.

Marijuana: Benefits and Risks on A Person’s Health

Tetrault JM, Crothers K, Moore BA, Mehra R, Concato J, Fiellin DA. Effects of Marijuana Smoking on Pulmonary Function and Respiratory Complications: A Systematic Review. Arch Intern Med. 2007;167(3):221–228. doi:10.1001/archinte.167.3.221

This article reviews a series of extracted studies from MEDLINE, PyschINFO, and EMBASE databases, all of which evaluate the effects of smoking marijuana on pulmonary function and respiratory complications. Two reviewers selected the quality of the study based on an established criterion. The studies evaluate the short-term and long-term effects of smoking marijuana in comparison to smoking tobacco. The reviewers suggest that this article, despite the limitations of the studies, should be a standard criterion for large prospective studies to account for the confounding factors. The article is directed towards physicians because in the conclusion, it has a quote that states, who the article was intended for. I will be using this article in my research paper because it contains significant information on the risks factors of marijuana and the different effects smoking marijuana versus tobacco, all of which would help me to illustrate both sides of the argument.

Nader, D. A., & Sanchez, Z. M. (2018). Effects of regular cannabis use on neurocognition, brain structure, and function: a systematic review of findings in adults. American Journal of Drug & Alcohol Abuse, 44(1), 4–18. https://doi-org.echo.louisville.edu/10.1080/00952990.2017.1306746

This article features a review of studies that are aimed to evaluate the effects of daily marijuana usage on cognition abilities and brain structure and functions on sample groups of adults, divided into three categories for comparison: regular marijuana users, former regular marijuana users, and non-users/occasional users. Reviewers evaluated a large number of studies based on their criterion, and once approved, the studies were broken into three categories of study: neuropsychological studies, structural neuroimaging studies, and functional studies. The article took the results from all of these various studies and compare the results among each other to suggest that neurologists need to conduct further research to verify consistencies. I’m choosing to use this article because it has interesting variations of results that connect to marijuana usage.

Tawfik, GM., Hashan, MR., Abdelaal, A., Tieu, TM., Huy, NT. (2019). A commentary on the medicinal use of marijuana. Tropical medicine and health, 47(35). doi:10.1186/s41182-019-0161-x.

In this article, they evaluate the debate of marijuana usage, suggesting that more research needs to be conducted to evaluate the short-term and long-term effects of marijuana. The writers mention several benefits and risks that have been studied and published; however, there are multiple contradictory studies that oppose these findings. Also, since medical and recreational dosage and usage are different; then both would need to be evaluated. The article is also directed towards physicians, neurologists, cardiologists, etc. as a call to action for them to investigate the short-term and long-term effects on health and publish further evidence-based research to prove the perceived benefits and risks. I believe that I will include several portions of this article to help support the thesis of my research paper, but also illustrate the other side of the argument.

Keyhani, S., Steigerwald, S., Ishida, J., Vali, M., Cerda, M., Hasin, D., Dollinger, C., Yoo, SR., Cohen, BE. (2018). Risks and benefits of marijuana use: a national survey of U.S. adults. Annals of internal medicine, 169(5), 282-290.

This article contains a study on the public’s perception on marijuana usage risks and benefits. The researchers wanted to create a comprehensive view of how U.S. adults, on average, feel about marijuana. The researchers used an online survey to collect data and asked the following questions: 1) does the participant believe that marijuana has benefits, if so, the participant was asked to list the perceived benefits; 2) does the participant believe there are any risks associated with marijuana, and if so, the participant was asked to list the perceived risks. Although the effects of marijuana usage have not been completely proven, the article is aimed toward physicians, neurologists, etc. to evaluate and prove the perceived benefits, and risks. The statistical data and discussion contained in this article is very interesting and thorough, so I will likely include reference of the research in my essay.

Budney, A.J., Novy, P.L. and Hughes, J.R. (1999), Marijuana withdrawal among adults seeking treatment for marijuana dependence. Addiction, 94: 1311-1322. doi:10.1046/j.1360-0443.1999.94913114.x

In this article, researchers evaluate the possible addictive factors of marijuana. Researchers selected a sample of participants who are previous marijuana users currently seeking treatment/rehabilitation for marijuana-related problems. Then the researchers observed the severity of the withdrawal symptoms within each participant, such as the behavioral issues, mood changes, and physical impairments. Much like the other articles, the researchers suggest more clinical studies need to be conducted to understand the significance of marijuana withdrawal symptoms and the severity of the symptoms. The article’s conclusion is directed toward psychologists, and psychiatrists to investigate these symptoms. The statistical data and information included in this article is interesting, and shocking because I believed that marijuana had no addictive properties. I will be including the information that I found within this article in my research paper.