Citation

McKenna FP. Accid. Anal. Prev. 1983; 15(1): 65-71.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1983, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The concept of accident proneness has had a long and controversial history. An attempt is made both to demonstrate the nature of this controversy and to investigate the reasons for its occurrence. Two factors are identified. One is the conceptual confusion surrounding the meaning of the concept. This is accounted for by the fact that accident proneness is defined by exclusion. The second factor is the repetitive use of statistical techniques which have been shown to be equivocal. An alternative approach to individual differences in accident involvement is advocated. This approach cuts through the conceptual confusion and is less susceptible to the criticisms which have been levelled against the traditional statistical techniques.