Abstract
In this study we examine how participants allocate blame after reading one of several variants of a fictitious product-use scenario that describes a construction worker who is injured after falling through an acrylic panel used in the construction of greenhouses. The safety practices and policies exhibited by the manufacturer, distributor, construction company owner and worker were cast either in a positive or negative light. Among the variables studied was the quality of the product warning and the methods used to distribute safety materials (e.g., installation manual) to the end user (panel installers). The results showed that blame allocation fell “downstream”, where most blame fell on the party that failed to distribute the safety information to the next step of the chain. The effects of distribution breakdown on blame was moderated by the type of warning provided by the manufacturer in that greater blame was placed on the negligent party when a good warning is used, and part of the blame for the accident was shifted to the manufacturer when it provided a poor warning, regardless of where the breakdown occurred. The implications of these results for consumers, legal professionals, and researchers are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.