The impact of interlock installation on driving behavior and drinking behavior related to driving.

Thomas H Nochajski, Amy R Manning, Robert Voas, Eileen P Taylor, Michael Scherer, Eduardo Romano
Author Information
  1. Thomas H Nochajski: School of Social Work, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York.
  2. Amy R Manning: School of Social Work, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York.
  3. Robert Voas: Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Calverton, Maryland.
  4. Eileen P Taylor: Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Calverton, Maryland.
  5. Michael Scherer: Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Calverton, Maryland.
  6. Eduardo Romano: Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, Calverton, Maryland.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: There is a substantial body of evidence that the recidivism of impaired-driving offenders is reduced while an ignition interlock device (IID) is on their vehicles. This study examines changes in driving behaviors and drinking behaviors used by DWI offenders to manage driving with the IID.
METHODS: A total of 166 IID participants who completed two surveys covering the period from arrest to IID installation (T1) and during IID use (T2) were examined. Four domains were covered: demographics, driving environments and transportation needs, reported driving activity, and reported drinking activities. Participants were on average 38 years old, 43% were female, 35% completed college, 34% had an income of more than $50,000, and 83% were employed. For those who provided it, the mean blood alcohol content (BAC) at arrest was .184 g/dL, with only 8 (5%) individuals below .08 g/dL, and 93 (56%) at over .18 g/dL. About 45% were repeat DWI offenders.
RESULTS: Between T1 and T2 there was a slight increase in acknowledging public transportation was available (p=.001), an increase in other individuals driving the interlock-equipped vehicle (p=.002), an increase in the number of vehicles in the household not registered to the DWI offender (p< .001), and an increase in the number of participants who reported that driving was important to their lifestyle (p=.008). Initial (T1) expectations about whether the interlock would be a problem were significantly different from actual experiences reported in T2 (p<.001). With respect to alcohol consumption, 14% reported abstinence at T2 compared to 2% at T1 (p=.001) and the number of drinks per drinking occasion decreased from a mean of 4.90 at T1 to 3.14 at T2 (p=.001), but the number of drinking occasions increased by a third (p=.003). The number of drinking locations (p=.001), the frequency of stopping after work for a drink (p=.001), and drinking at a bar all decreased (p<.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Interlock users make some adjustments in how they drink, the amount they drink, and where they drink. This finding suggests that there may be methods that can be used to extend the benefits of the IID beyond the sanction period.

Keywords

References

  1. Accid Anal Prev. 2019 Mar;124:210-218 [PMID: 30677694]
  2. Traffic Inj Prev. 2021;22(8):589-592 [PMID: 34686075]
  3. Am J Public Health. 2016 May;106(5):865-71 [PMID: 26985604]
  4. Am J Prev Med. 1999 Jan;16(1 Suppl):81-7 [PMID: 9921390]
  5. Addiction. 1999 Dec;94(12):1861-70 [PMID: 10717964]
  6. Traffic Inj Prev. 2015;16(4):329-35 [PMID: 25133305]
  7. Accid Anal Prev. 2001 Sep;33(5):609-19 [PMID: 11491241]
  8. Addiction. 2010 Feb;105(2):226-39 [PMID: 19922520]
  9. Am J Prev Med. 2011 Mar;40(3):362-76 [PMID: 21335270]
  10. Traffic Inj Prev. 2015;16(7):637-44 [PMID: 25664371]
  11. J Stud Alcohol. 2003 Jan;64(1):83-92 [PMID: 12608487]
  12. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2007 Jun;31(6):974-87 [PMID: 17403067]
  13. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2016 Sep;40(9):1953-60 [PMID: 27427288]
  14. Am J Prev Med. 2017 Apr;52(4):417-423 [PMID: 28065516]
  15. J Stud Alcohol. 2002 Nov;63(6):655-64 [PMID: 12529065]
  16. Forensic Sci Rev. 2020 Jan;32(1):55-81 [PMID: 32007928]

Grants

  1. R01 AA022312/NIAAA NIH HHS

MeSH Term

Adult
Alcohol Drinking
Automobile Driving
Criminals
Driving Under the Influence
Female
Humans
Male
New York
Program Evaluation
Protective Devices
Recidivism
Surveys and Questionnaires

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0drivingdrinkingp=001IIDT1T2reportednumberoffendersinterlockDWIincreasedrinkp<vehiclesbehaviorsusedparticipantscompletedperiodarrestinstallationtransportationmeanalcoholindividualsdecreasedbehaviorpatternsOBJECTIVE:substantialbodyevidencerecidivismimpaired-drivingreducedignitiondevicestudyexamineschangesmanageMETHODS:total166twosurveyscoveringuseexaminedFourdomainscovered:demographicsenvironmentsneedsactivityactivitiesParticipantsaverage38 yearsold43%female35%college34%income$5000083%employedprovidedbloodcontentBAC184 g/dL85%08 g/dL9356%18 g/dL45%repeatRESULTS:slightacknowledgingpublicavailableinterlock-equippedvehicle002householdregisteredoffenderimportantlifestyle008Initialexpectationswhetherproblemsignificantlydifferentactualexperiencesrespectconsumption14%abstinencecompared2%drinksperoccasion490314occasionsincreasedthird003locationsfrequencystoppingworkbarCONCLUSIONS:Interlockusersmakeadjustmentsamountfindingsuggestsmaymethodscanextendbenefitsbeyondsanctionimpactrelatedimpaired

Similar Articles

Cited By