عزو مسؤولية حوادث السير : دراسة تجريبية

Abstract EN

The aim of this study was to examine the differences in assigning the responsibility for car accidents.

Specifically, it aimed to examine the differences in each attributional style in assigning the responsibility for car accident according to the sex of the subject , accident consequences, perpetrator and observer personal and situational similarity.

Finally it aimed to rest Walster's Defense attributional hypothesis and Shaver's at-tribuational hypothesis.

This study consisted of 120 subjects of whom 60 were males and 60 were females.

An instrument consisted of full description of different car accident situations was developed.

Findings showed significant differences (between males vs.

females and similar vs.

not similar) in assigning car accident responsibility attributed to perpetrator,partner, and situation (with the exceptional of external forces) (F=2.739.

p=02, F=2.415, p=02;-E=2.526.

p=02 & F=0.847, p-25 respectively).

Moreover, significant differences were found between males and females in assigning the responsibility attributed to ( Perpetrator, partner, situation and external forces).

Finally, findings of this study support Walster's hypothesis (F-27.645, p=0001),