This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by DONOVAN, D. M. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Driving While Intoxicated

Different Roads to and from the Problem

Veterans Administration Medical Center Seattle, WA University of Washington

Driving while intoxicated (DWI) continues to be a major societal concern, exacting a high personal and financial cost. The present article reviews the current scope of the drinking-driving problem and a number of countermeasures employed to reduce it. Primary prevention strategies target young drivers with the goal of preventing the initiation of drinking-driving behavior. Driver's training and drinking-driver education classes have had a minimal impact on DWI. Increasing the minimum age for purchasing alcohol has been considerably more effective. Secondary interventions target the general driving population and are based on the principles of general deterrence. Increasing the perceived risk of arrest and punishment appears to have a short-term impact; increased severity of punishment also has limited effects. Tertiary interventions, or specific deterrents, target convicted DWI offenders with the goal of reducing recidivism. Alcohol education and rehabilitation have shown only a weak positive impact on DWI. License suspension/revocation appears to be an effective and efficient specific deterrent. Overall, it is suggested that the approach with the greatest potential for reducing the drinking-driving problem is an integrated, complementary countermeasure aimed at both person and sociocultural factors.

Criminal Justice and Behavior, Vol. 16, No. 3, 270-298 (1989)
DOI: 10.1177/0093854889016003003


CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L. W. BAKKER, S. M. HUDSON, and T. WARD Reducing Recidivism in Driving While Disqualified: A Treatment Evaluation Criminal Justice and Behavior, October 1, 2000; 27(5): 531 - 560. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. K. Applegate, F. T. Cullen, S. M. Barton, P. J. Richards, L. Lanza-Kaduce, and B. G. Link Public Support for Drunk-Driving Countermeasures: Social Policy for Saving Lives Crime Delinquency, April 1, 1995; 41(2): 171 - 190. [Abstract]

				R. F. Kingsnorth Specific Deterrence and the DUI Offender: The Impact of California's Administrative Per Se Law Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, December 1, 1993; 9(4): 328 - 342.

				B. J. Morse and D. S. Elliott Effects of Ignition Interlock Devices on DUI Recidivism: Findings from a Longitudinal Study in Hamilton County, Ohio Crime Delinquency, April 1, 1992; 38(2): 131 - 157. [Abstract]

				R. F. KINGSNORTH The Gunther Special: Deterrence and the DUI Offender Criminal Justice and Behavior, September 1, 1991; 18(3): 251 - 266. [Abstract]