What rationale is being employed when an inexperienced driver blames the other party for an accident?

The rationale being employed in this scenario is rationalization, a defense mechanism where an individual justifies or explains an event or action in a seemingly reasonable or logical manner, even if the reasoning is flawed or not grounded in reality. In the context of an inexperienced driver blaming another party for an accident, this behavior reflects a coping strategy to deal with feelings of guilt or shame about their own potential mistakes. By attributing the fault to someone else, the driver attempts to maintain their self-esteem and avoid taking responsibility for their actions, which can be especially prominent in someone lacking experience.

Rationalization allows the driver to feel justified in their feelings and reactions rather than confronting the reality of their involvement in the situation. It is a common psychological response that helps individuals avoid emotional distress by framing incidents in a way that minimizes their role in the conflict or accident. This differs from other choices, as the driver is not merely making an excuse or denying their involvement entirely; they are actively constructing a narrative that shifts fault elsewhere.