A Decision Making Model of the Allocation of Blame in Product Liability

Abstract

There has been a great deal of research recently into the allocation of blame in product liability cases. Studies have investigated how blame is allocated in a broad variety of situations among parties such as consumers, manufacturers, retailers, children, employers, and others. These studies have provided companies with guidance on how to maximize the effects of their safety efforts and attorneys with advice on how to select jurors and how much information to provide during trial. However, none of these studies has generated a general cognitive model that describes and can predict the allocation of blame. Such a model would enable more detailed analysis of the decision making process that underlies the allocation of blame. This paper will describe the elaboration of a naturalistic decision making model applied to the allocation of blame. The results of several research projects will be explained using this framework. Suggestions for future work that would refine the model are presented.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Beach

L.R.

Lipshitz

(1993). Why Classical decision theory is an inappropriate standard for evaluating and aiding most human decision making. In Klein

G.A.

Orasanu

Calderwood

MacGregor

Decision Making in Action: Models and Methods. Norwood NJ, Ablex Publishing.

Cohen

M.S.

Freeman

J.T.

Wolf

(1996). Metarecognition in time-stressed decision making: Recognizing, critiquing, and correcting. Human Factors, 38 (2), 206–219.

Kaempf

G.L.

Klein

Thordsen

M.L.

Wolf

(1996). Decision making in complex naval command-and-control environments. Human Factors, 38 (2), 220–231.

Klein

G.A.

(1993). A recognition-primed decision (RPD) model of rapid decision making. In Klein

G.A.

Orasanu

Calderwood

MacGregor

Decision Making in Action: Models and Methods. Norwood NJ, Ablex Publishing.

Laughery

K.R.

Lovvoll

D.R.

Wogalter

M.S.

(1995). Allocation of responsibility for product safety. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 39th Annual Meeting, 1, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Santa Monica, CA. 435–439.

Orasanu

Connolly

(1993). The Reinvention of Decision Making. In Klein

G.A.

Orasanu

Calderwood

MacGregor

Decision Making in Action: Models and Methods. Norwood NJ, Ablex Publishing.

Pennington

Hastie

(1986). Evidence evaluation in complex decision making. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 51 (2), p 242–258.

Pennington

Hastie

(1988). Explanation-based decision making: Effects of memory structure on judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 14 (3), p 521–533.

Pennington

Hastie

(1993). A theory of explanation-based decision making. In Klein

G.A.

Orasanu

Calderwood

MacGregor

Decision Making in Action: Models and Methods. Norwood NJ, Ablex Publishing.

10.

Phoenix

G.M.

Kalsher

M.J.

Chapagne

M.V.

(1997) Allocation of responsibility for injuries sustained from the use of technologically-mediated consumer products. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 41nd Annual Meeting. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Santa Monica, CA. 400–404.

11.

Randel

J.M.

Pugh

H.L.

(1996). Differences in expert and novice situation awareness in naturalistic decision making International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45, 579–597.

12.

Resnick

M.L.

Tschen

Kalsher

(1999). The effects of company image on perceptions of legal responsibility. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 43rd Annual Meeting. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Santa Monica, CA.

13.

Resnick

M.L.

Zanotti

Jacko

J.A.

(1997). Cultural differences in the perception of responsibility for child safety. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 41st Annual Meeting. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Santa Monica, CA. 836–839.