Feigenson, N. (2000). How jurors think about accidents. In N. Feigenson, The law and public policy. Legal blame: How jurors think and talk about accidents (pp. 87-111). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/10358-004
In this chapter the author attempts to integrate the various psychological phenomena discussed in chapters 2 and 3 into a more coherent view of the common sense of accidents. He makes three general observations. First, several important judgmental heuristics, including monocausality, norm theory, fundamental attribution error, and culpable causation, point toward a common-sense conception of accidents as melodramas. Research on the role of emotions in comparative negligence judgments offers empirical support for this conception. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)