Characteristics of DUI offenders with a high versus low perceived risk of arrest.

OBJECTIVE: To compare offenders with high versus low perceptions of risk for being stopped by police for drinking and driving using measures of beliefs, behaviors, social context of drinking, and perceived influence from a significant other in their social network. METHOD: Telephone interviews were conducted with 161 individuals who received a first-time driving under the influence (DUI) citation in Maryland. They were divided into 2 groups: those who felt that it was almost certain or very likely that they would be stopped by the police if they drove after having too much to drink (n = 56) and those who felt that it was only somewhat likely or unlikely (n = 105). RESULTS: The 2 groups did not differ in terms of age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, employment, or marital status. Offenders with a low perceived risk of being stopped were less likely to believe that they would be convicted if they were stopped and arrested. They were more likely to report having an encounter with an aggressive driver, running through a stop sign or traffic light, drinking in a context of social facilitation, knowing someone in their social network who had received a DUI citation, and having a member of their social network suggest that they had had too much to drink and could not drive safely. CONCLUSIONS: The social context of drinking and the relationship they have to their social network have important implications for influencing first DUI offenders and preventing them from recidivating.

A descriptive analysis of the social context of drinking among first-time DUI offenders.

OBJECTIVE: To understand the role of social context in contributing to the incidence of alcohol-impaired driving. METHODS: Telephone interviews were conducted with 161 individuals who received a first-time DUI citation. They were predominantly white (70%), male (62%) and 21 to 45 years of age (62%). They were paid $25 for their participation. Questions were asked about their social network, the social context in which they typically drink, the specific location and circumstances where they were drinking at the time of their citation, risky driving behaviors, in the last month as well as the number of traffic tickets they received and crashes they have been involved in since they started to drive. RESULTS: Two reliable social contexts of drinking were identified through principle components factors analysis: emotional pain and social facilitation. Analyses of variance showed that drinking in a context of emotional pain (eg, to deal with depression, stress) was related to drinking alone at this location and driving when they know they have had too much to drink. Drinking in a context of social facilitation (eg, with friends, to be sociable) was related to drinking more frequently and with others (versus alone) at this location. Social facilitation was also positively related to driving over the speed limit and running a red light/stop sign. CONCLUSIONS: The social context of drinking is important for understanding the social network of drinking drivers, because most (86%) said that someone from their social network was with them at this drinking location. The need to understand how significant others influence the context of drinking as well as the likelihood of impaired driving is critical for program development. These results suggest that different types of interventions are needed for offenders depending on their social context of drinking.