This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Faculty of Philosophy, University PIM Banja Luka , Banja Luka , Bosnia and Herzegovina
Faculty of Philosophy, University PIM Banja Luka , Banja Luka , Bosnia and Herzegovina
Despite the lack of faith in the concept of accident proneness, there is a body of empirical work that links some personality traits with accident involvement. An early literature review by Keehn (1961) concluded that extraversion, possibly accompanied by neurosis, is associated with higher accident liability. Many studies that examine the relationship between personality and accident involvement have focused upon road traffic accidents. One of the difficulties with personality studies is that they have lacked a coherent taxonomy, resulting in a wide variety of personality traits being measured, using a mixture of different types of methodology. Older studies, until the 1970s, used questionnaires (e.g. Katz adjustment scales), projective tests (e.g. TAT, Rorschach) and clinical interviews, while more recent studies favor personality inventories, such as 16PF. The personality traits measured include extraversion, neuroticism, social maladjustment, aggression, impulsivity, locus of control, sensation-seeking and, more recently, positive affectivity/negative affectivity and Type A behavior. To clarify the existing literature, Robertson and Clarke (2002) conducted a metaanalysis of personality and occupational accidents, using the “big five” taxonomy to categorize personality traits. The results revealed criterion-related validity (uncorrected) for four of the big five factors: (low) agreeableness, openness, neuroticism and (low) conscientiousness (with uncorrected mean validities of 0.32, 0.29, 0.19 and 0.15 respectively). These indicated that individuals high in openness and neuroticism, and low in agreeableness and conscientiousness, are more liable to be accident involved
The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
