This meta-analysis analysed 79 studies to determine whether accident proneness really exists.
Accident proneness is the clustering of accident-related health problems in some individuals compared to others. For instance, an earlier study from 1919 “were the first to observe that a relatively small proportion of workers in a British munitions factory had most of the accidents”.
The findings indicated that accidents clustered around certain individuals in the general population and that this clustering “is higher than the clustering one would expect by chance alone”. Therefore, “there are more individuals with repetitive injuries than would be expected by chance alone”.
They note that while accident proneness calculations can be made, it’s difficult to identify who these individuals are.
However, they caution interpretation within the context of the study’s limitations, given the large heterogeneity between the studies, inconsistencies in how accidents are defined and more.
Moreover, consideration of the contextual factors is essential (something this meta-analysis couldn’t evaluate).
Ref: Visser, E., Pijl, Y. J., Stolk, R. P., Neeleman, J., & Rosmalen, J. G. M. (2007). Accident proneness, does it exist? A review and meta-analysis. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 39(3), 556-564.
Study link: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2006.09.012
SafetyInsights.org 
One thought on “Does Accident Proneness exist? A meta-analysis suggests ‘Yes’”