Which of the following describes a standard for care that must be met to avoid negligence?

The reasonable person standard is a key concept in negligence law that serves as a benchmark for determining whether an individual's actions are considered negligent. This standard is based on how a hypothetical reasonable person would act in similar circumstances. It establishes the expectation of behavior within a community, promoting accountability and care in one’s actions.

When assessing whether someone has acted negligently, the court considers if the individual's conduct aligns with what a reasonable person would do to avoid causing harm. This includes looking at factors such as the risks involved, the seriousness of the potential harm, and the actions that a similarly situated reasonable person would take to mitigate that risk.

This standard is crucial as it allows for an objective assessment rather than a subjective one, which is pivotal in legal contexts. By evaluating conduct against this standard, it provides a clear framework for judges and juries to decide if a duty of care has been breached.

In contrast, the other options do not serve as widely accepted standards for assessing negligence. The intentional conduct standard refers to actions taken with intent, while the average performance standard focuses on typical abilities rather than a reasonable expectation of care. The default conduct standard is not a recognized term in this context. Therefore, the reasonable person standard is the most appropriate and established criterion for evaluating negligence