English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In order to explain the process of responsibility judgments for an automobile accident, the estimates of self-based consensus (i.e., would I have behaved as the motorist did?) and samplebased consensus (i.e., would ordinary people have behaved as the motorist did?) were introduced as mediational variables. As expected, for all three accident situations utilized in the present study, the extent of responsibility attributed to the motorist was found to be negatively correlated with both self-based and sample-based consensus estimates, and a highly positive correlation was observed between these two types of consensus estimates. In addition, a consistent tendency of differences emerged when subjects were divided into two groups on the basis of whether or not they had a driver's license, in that driver subjects generated lower consensus estimates and attributed greater responsibility to the accident perpetrator than did nondriver subjects. Implications of these results for the issue of self-protective motivational biases were discussed, together with the conceptual issue of responsibility which was addressed to in the present study by incorporation of test-retest procedure and by inclusion of sanction measures.

Role of self-based and sample-based consensus estimates as mediators of responsibility judgments for automobile accidents