Evaluation of Responsible Beverage Service to Reduce Impaired Driving by 21- to 34-Year-Old Drivers [Traffic Tech]
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 study evaluates a multi-faceted intervention designed to reduce impaired driving among 21- to 34-year-old drivers, a demographic identified as high-risk for alcohol-related crashes. The research was motivated by evidence that approximately half of intoxicated drivers consume their last drink at licensed bars or restaurants, with over-service and serving obviously intoxicated patrons being significant risk factors. The objective was to determine if integrating Responsible Beverage Service (RBS) training with targeted enforcement and corrective actions could reduce over-service practices, thereby lowering Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) arrests and crash rates. The evaluation was conducted between January and October 2009 in two primary communities: Monroe County, New York, and Cleveland, Ohio. The study employed a quasi-experimental design comparing 10 intervention bars against 10 control bars within each community. Intervention bars were selected based on indicators of over-service problems, such as place-of-last-drink data from DWI arrests and law enforcement calls-for-service. Data collection occurred at three waves: pre-intervention, approximately six months post-intervention, and approximately one year post-intervention. Eight data-collection methods were utilized, including pseudo-patron assessments, bar observations by alcohol beverage control officials, patron breath tests, self-reported driving behavior surveys, and analysis of police records for calls-for-service, DWI arrests, and crash involvement. Additionally, Onondaga County, New York, and Toledo, Ohio, served as comparison communities to assess broader regional changes. Results varied by location and timing. In Monroe County, the intervention showed a delayed but significant effect one year after startup. Intervention bars demonstrated significantly greater reductions in average patron Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC) and the proportion of intoxicated patrons compared to control bars. This site also experienced significant reductions in calls-for-service and a significant drop in DWI arrests among 21- to 34-year-olds, contrasting with an increase in the comparison community. In Cleveland, the intervention yielded significant short-term improvements in the first post-intervention period, including lower average BACs and higher rates of service refusal by staff. However, these effects were not sustained in the second post-intervention period, where intoxication levels in intervention bars increased significantly. The study concludes that RBS training coupled with visible, sustained enforcement can effectively reduce bar patron intoxication and associated impaired driving risks. The findings validate prior research suggesting that when bar managers and servers are trained and aware of enforcement, over-service decreases. While the intervention’s impact varied in sustainability between the two sites, the cumulative evidence supports RBS as a valuable countermeasure. The authors suggest that widespread implementation of this strategy could significantly reduce impaired driving and alcohol-attributable harm, provided that enforcement remains consistent to maintain long-term effects.
Key finding
In Monroe County intervention bars, average patron BAC and the proportion of intoxicated patrons (BAC at or above .08) fell significantly more than in control bars by the second post-intervention period.
Methodology
field_study
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 (7 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 | — | — | — | 3 | 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