Court Procedures for Identifying Problem Drinkers: Phase II
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 details Phase II of a research project aimed at developing efficient, objective court procedures for identifying problem drinkers among drivers convicted of alcohol-related offenses. Motivated by the high prevalence of problem drinking among drivers involved in alcohol-related crashes, the study sought to create diagnostic tools that were simple, inexpensive, and required minimal professional training to administer. The primary goal was to enable courts to distinguish between problem drinkers and non-problem drinkers to institute appropriate countermeasures. The methodology involved refining a diagnostic manual developed in Phase I, which consisted of a paper-and-pencil questionnaire and a structured interview. In Phase II, the preliminary manual was reviewed by a panel of six experts, including judges, psychologists, and medical directors, who recommended simplifying the language and separating background theory from operational instructions. Consequently, the manual was revised into three volumes: the operational manual, supplementary readings, and scoring keys. The revised instruments were field-tested in five Michigan county alcohol safety programs with 69 drivers convicted of Driving Under the Influence of Liquor (DUIL). Additionally, the manual was applied to 60 convicted drivers in a separate University of Southern California research program. The results demonstrated strong validity and practical utility. In the initial validation study involving 192 known alcoholics and 297 controls, the combined questionnaire and interview scores showed high concurrent validity (point-biserial correlation of 0.92) and reliability (0.98). The field tests in Michigan yielded good agreement between the manual’s diagnoses and those made by experienced court workers. The manual diagnosed 66% of the 69 Michigan drivers as problem drinkers, a finding that correlated substantially (r=0.75) with the original diagnoses made by county programs. Similarly, over 60% of the USC participants were identified as problem drinkers. The study also noted that administration times in the field (mean of 20 minutes for the questionnaire and 34 minutes for the interview) were longer than in controlled validation settings, likely due to the exploratory nature of interviews conducted by experienced counselors. The significance of this work lies in providing a standardized, objective tool for identifying alcohol problems in legal settings where professional diagnostic resources may be limited. The high agreement between the manual’s scores and expert clinical judgments supports its effectiveness. However, the authors conclude that further field testing and validation are necessary to ascertain the continuing effectiveness of the procedures and to refine the operational needs of court workers.
Key finding
The HSRI questionnaire and interview manual diagnosed 66% of 69 Michigan DUIL offenders as problem drinkers, with a 0.75 correlation between its diagnoses and those made by cooperating county programs.
Methodology
field_study
Sample size: 69
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 | — | — | 19 | 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).
- Methodological Resource: validation psychometrics