An Evaluation of a Host Responsibility Program
archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified
Get this paper ↗ (full text — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)
Summary
This report evaluates a "Host Responsibility Program" designed to reduce alcohol-impaired driving by encouraging social hosts to intervene in the drinking and driving of their guests. The research was motivated by roadside surveys indicating that the homes of relatives and friends are the second-largest source of impaired drivers, trailing only commercial bars and restaurants. While public information campaigns like "Friends don't let friends drive drunk" existed, there was a lack of formal instructional programs for adult hosts, unlike those available for commercial servers or youth. The study aimed to develop and test an intervention program targeting adult private hosts to improve their knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors regarding responsible alcohol service. The Host Responsibility Program was a one-hour instructional session comprising a 20-minute video presentation on the magnitude of the drinking-driving problem and intervention procedures, a 20-minute group discussion, and 25 minutes of role-playing exercises where participants practiced intervening with impaired guests. The program was field-tested with 271 volunteer participants across eight locations in the United States. Evaluation utilized a pre-post design without a control group. Participants completed knowledge tests and attitude measures before and immediately after the program. Self-reported behavior measures were administered prior to the program and again via mail two months post-program, with a 53% follow-up rate. To mitigate testing bias, equivalent forms of the knowledge test were used for pre- and post-assessments. The results demonstrated statistically significant improvements in all measured domains. Participants showed significant gains in knowledge ($t = 5.52, p < .001$) and shifts toward more responsible attitudes ($t = 10.59, p < .001$). The most pronounced attitude changes concerned the perceived effectiveness of intervention and the advantages of intervening, though attitudes regarding the importance of intervention did not shift, likely because participants already held strong views on this matter. Self-reported behavior changes were also significant ($t = 3.27, p < .001$), primarily affecting alcohol service practices ($t = 3.41, p < .001$) and party-giving habits ($t = 2.54, p = .01$). However, no significant changes were observed in behaviors related to caring for intoxicated guests or making advanced arrangements to prevent impaired driving. There were no significant differences in the magnitude of change across the various geographic locations. The study concludes that a structured instructional program can yield small but significant improvements in the knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of social hosts regarding drinking-driving intervention. The findings suggest that such programs are most effective in altering alcohol service and party management practices rather than more complex interventions involving intoxicated guests. The results support the viability of host responsibility programs as a tool for traffic safety, particularly when delivered through community organizations, though they highlight the need for further development to address broader intervention behaviors.
Key finding
Participants in the Host Responsibility Program demonstrated statistically significant small but positive changes in knowledge, attitudes, and self-reported behaviors related to intervening in the drinking and driving of guests.
Methodology
field_study
Sample size: 271
Provenance
The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed. Discovered via bulk_ingest_rosap on 2026-05-23 (6 acquisition events logged).
| Stage | Outcome | Tool | Model | Prompt | Attempts | Completed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| discover | success | rosap | — | — | 2 | 2026-05-23 |
| archive | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-05-23 |
| extract | success | cached | — | — | 2 | 2026-06-10 |
| clean | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-01 |
| chunk | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-01 |
| embed | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-02 |
| enrich | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-05-23 |
| promote | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-05-23 |
| summarize | success | llm | qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant | summ-v5 | 3 | 2026-06-10 |
| tag | success | vector_similarity | — | — | 24 | 2026-06-11 |
| verify | success | — | — | — | 2 | 2026-06-10 |
Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-10; verification: verified.
Topics
Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.
Information type
What kind of knowledge this paper contributes, grouped by family — independent of topic (what it is about) and method (how it was studied).
- Applied Guidance: countermeasure evaluation