How can repeat drunk drivers be influenced to change? Analysis of the association between drunk driving and DUI recidivists' attitudes and beliefs.
Michael David Greenberg, Andrew R. Morral, Arvind Kumar Jain
Abstract
Michael David Greenberg, Andrew R. Morral, Arvind Kumar Jain
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Public policy interventions designed to deter or prevent drunk driving depend, in part, on modifying beliefs concerning the riskiness, social acceptability and immorality of driving under the influence of alcohol. The current study examines the association of these beliefs with the incidence of alcohol-impaired driving. METHOD: Interviews were conducted with 273 people with multiple driving under the influence (DUI) offenses. Data included self-reported frequency of driving after drinking in the past year, as well as measures of moral and prescriptive beliefs concerning alcohol-impaired driving (internal behavioral controls), perceived risks of criminal punishment and accidents associated with alcohol-impaired driving (external behavioral controls) and perceived peer group attitudes toward alcohol-impaired driving (social controls). RESULTS: Logit regression modeling showed significant, unique protective associations with behavioral control items in each category. CONCLUSIONS: Behavioral controls may protect against alcohol-impaired driving behavior even in a high-risk sample of repeat DUI offenders. Policy interventions designed to curtail drunk driving might seek to enhance these sorts of behavioral controls among DUI offenders.
OpenAlex reports 24 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
OBJECTIVE: Public policy interventions designed to deter or prevent drunk driving depend, in part, on modifying beliefs concerning the riskiness, social acceptability and immorality of driving under the influence of alcohol. The current study examines the association of these beliefs with the incidence of alcohol-impaired driving. METHOD: Interviews were conducted with 273 people with multiple driving under the influence (DUI) offenses. Data included self-reported frequency of driving after drinking in the past year, as well as measures of moral and prescriptive beliefs concerning alcohol-impaired driving (internal behavioral controls), perceived risks of criminal punishment and accidents associated with alcohol-impaired driving (external behavioral controls) and perceived peer group attitudes toward alcohol-impaired driving (social controls). RESULTS: Logit regression modeling showed significant, unique protective associations with behavioral control items in each category. CONCLUSIONS: Behavioral controls may protect against alcohol-impaired driving behavior even in a high-risk sample of repeat DUI offenders. Policy interventions designed to curtail drunk driving might seek to enhance these sorts of behavioral controls among DUI offenders.
Key concepts: Driving under the influence, Drunk drivers, Drunk driving, Psychology, Psychological intervention, Poison control, Injury prevention, Human factors and ergonomics