Veljko Dubljevic PhD
University Faculty Scholar, Joseph D. Moore Distinguished Professor of Philosophy and Science, Technology & Society (STS)
Withers Hall 453
[email protected]Bio
Veljko Dubljević, Ph.D., D.Phil., University Faculty Scholar and Joseph D. Moore Distinguished Professor of Philosophy and STS (Science, Technology and Society) at NC State University, leads the NeuroComputational Ethics Research Group. He is the Editor in Chief of American Journal of Bioethics – Neuroscience, series co-editor for “Advances in Neuroethics,” and serves on the Board of Directors of the International Neuroethics Society. He is a prolific author in Neuroethics and Ethics of AI, having published over 100 peer-reviewed articles, and five books.
Education
Ph.D. Political Science University of Belgrade
D.Phil. Philosophy University of Stuttgart
Postdoctorate Neuroethics McGill University
M.Sc. Economics Educons University
Area(s) of Expertise
- Applied Ethics
- Science Technology and Society (STS)
- Neurocomputational Ethics
- Neurophilosophy
Teaching and Research Interests
My research focuses on the cognitive neuroscience of ethics as well as ethics of neurotechnology and AI.
Teaching at NC State:
MALS 501 Seminar in Liberal Studies
PHI 347 Neuroscience and Philosophy
PHI 214 Issues in Business Ethics
PHI 325 Bio-Medical Ethics
STS 403 Seminar in Science, Technology and Society
Projects
I am serving as the co-editor for the book series Advances in Neuroethics (http://www.springer.com/series/14360) and Editor-in-Chief of American Journal of Bioethics – Neuroscience (https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/uabn20/11/2).
Ongoing research projects reviewed by NC State IRB:
9362 The ADC of moral judgment
9484 Moral Judgment and Psychological Traits
12544 Moral Intuition and Frontal-Lobe Pathology
20276 Sociotechnical Principles for Ethics of Autonomous Vehicles and other AI Technologies
17933 Adapting the ADC Model for Use In the Study of Adolescent Morality
22375 Assessing the Harms and Benefits of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) treatment
Publications
- Awe Drives Positive Artificial Intelligence Related Outcomes Amongst College Students , SSRN Electronic Journal (2026)
- Managing GenAI Biosecurity Risks: A Comprehensive Approach to Ethical Management of Biosecurity Risks Related to the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence , SSRN Electronic Journal (2026)
- On Undisclosed or Improper Use of Generative AI and Sanctions , AJOB Neuroscience (2026)
- Police Officers’ Perspectives on Emergent Technologies: Guiding Responsible AI Adoption , Applied police briefings : (2026)
- Three Moral Fault Lines for Therapeutic Conversational Artificial Intelligence , The American Journal of Bioethics (2026)
- Understanding Public Perspectives in Germany Towards Illegal Stimulant Use for Neurocognitive Enhancement in Professional Roles: The Case of Doctors , Neuroethics (2026)
- Applying the Agent-Deed-Consequence (ADC) Model to Smart City Ethics , Algorithms (2025)
- Ethics in digital phenotyping: considerations regarding Alzheimer’s disease, speech and artificial intelligence , Journal of Medical Ethics (2025)
- Media representation of ethical and social issues inherent in autonomous vehicle technology , AI & Society (2025)
- Moral Complexity in Traffic: Advancing the ADC Model for Automated Driving Systems , Science and Engineering Ethics (2025)
Grants
Decisions made by AI already affect the wellbeing, health and lives of an increasing number of people. Therefore, new AI technologies such as autonomous vehicles (AVs) urgently need to be equipped with ethical guidance algorithms. The Agent-Deed-Consequence (ADC) model presents a new direction in the research on human moral decision making that could revolutionize the development of ethical AI technologies. Prior work with AI and AVs in particular was dominated by the use of utilitarianism both in algorithms and in framing public surveys regarding AVs. However, malicious actors could exploit the blindness of utilitarian AVs to other moral considerations, and this would inadvertently cause serious problems. Therefore, there is a need to offer alternative approaches that are adequately capturing the flexibility of human moral judgment. Previous work by the PI in developing and validating the ADC model provides a promising descriptive and normative account of human moral judgment and decision making, and also lends itself well for implementing moral decision making in AI and AVs. The ADC model explains moral judgments by breaking them down into positive or negative intuitive evaluations concerning the Agent, Deed, and Consequence, and designating the evaluation as ���������������high-������������������ or ���������������low-stakes������������������ in any given situation. These intuitive evaluations combine to produce a positive or negative judgment of moral acceptability. The ADC model is the first neurocomputational approach to moral judgment and decision making that simultaneously incorporates insights from all three dominant moral theories (virtue ethics, deontology, and utilitarianism) and manages to explain human judgment in both hazardous (or high-stakes) and non-hazardous (low-stakes) situations. AVs are domain-specific and thus can serve as a crucial test-case for the model of human moral decision making which incorporates multiple inputs and levels of hazard. This may lead to significant discoveries or technological advancements in related disciplines.