“…Since the conclusion by Greenwood and Woods (1919) that ‘…it seems that the genesis of multiple accidents under uniform external conditions is an affair of personality…’ ( Greenwood and Woods, 1919 ), psychologists have been interested in individual differences in accident causation. While accident proneness theory, that is, the idea people who repeatedly have accidents are accident prone, has been widely refuted by theoretical and empirical grounds ( McKenna, 1983 ; Salminen, 2001 ; Fay and Tissington, 2004 ; Purpura, 2019 ), the wide consensus among researchers seems to be that certain individual difference factors, such as cognitive factors or personality character traits, make some individuals more liable to accidents than others ( McKenna, 1983 ; Lawton and Parker, 1998 ; Diamant and Rusou, 2021 ; Niranjan et al, 2022 ). One difference between the ‘differential accident involvement’ concept by McKenna (1983) and ‘accident proneness’ ( Shaw and Sichel, 1971 ) is that the former refers to individual difference factors which increase the accident liability, whereas the latter focuses on the identification of ‘rotten apples’ who account for the most of the accidents.…”