Positive Community Norm Survey 2011 : Methodology and Results
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 presents the methodology and findings of the 2011 Positive Community Norm Survey, conducted by the University of Idaho’s Social Science Research Unit for the Idaho Transportation Department. The study aimed to establish a baseline understanding of Idaho residents’ attitudes, behaviors, and perceived social norms regarding impaired driving. The primary objective was to identify gaps between actual knowledge and perceived community norms to inform future public awareness campaigns designed to reduce single-vehicle run-off-road crashes caused by alcohol impairment. The researchers employed a dual-frame telephone survey methodology, sampling both landline and wireless numbers to ensure representativeness, given that 31.7% of Idaho households were wireless-only. The survey instrument, developed by the Western Transportation Institute, was administered via Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) software between November 2011 and January 2012. To boost response rates, pre-calling postcards were sent to landline respondents. The final dataset included 553 completed interviews, yielding a 28.5% response rate. Data were weighted to account for the complex survey design and compared against U.S. Census Bureau estimates to verify sample representativeness, which showed slight underrepresentation of adults aged 20–44 and overrepresentation of those aged 60–74. The results revealed strong consensus on the moral wrongness of impaired driving, with 94.3% of respondents agreeing that it is wrong to drive after drinking enough to be impaired. Respondents also expressed high personal responsibility for preventing others from driving impaired, particularly family members (97.1% agreement) and friends (94.0% agreement). However, confidence and willingness to intervene decreased as the relationship to the driver became more distant; only 59.7% felt they should try to prevent a stranger from driving impaired, and only 16.1% were confident they could do so. Regarding enforcement, 90.9% supported strong law enforcement of drinking and driving laws, though support for roadblocks was lower, with only 36.0% strongly agreeing. Behavioral data indicated that 53.0% of respondents had consumed alcohol in the past 30 days, and the mean number of times respondents drove within two hours of drinking in the past 60 days was 0.71. Notably, respondents perceived that most Idaho adults drove after drinking significantly more often (mean of 12.82 times) than they actually did. These findings provide critical data for the Idaho Transportation Department to tailor media messages that leverage positive community norms. By highlighting the gap between perceived and actual behaviors, and emphasizing the high level of support for intervening with close acquaintances, policymakers can develop targeted strategies to encourage bystander intervention and reduce traffic fatalities associated with impaired driving.
Key finding
94.3% of Idaho adults agreed that it is wrong to drive after drinking enough alcohol to be impaired, and 97.1% agreed they should try to prevent a family member from doing so, while only 59.7% agreed they should try to prevent a stranger from doing so.
Methodology
survey
Sample size: 553
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).
- Empirical Findings: observational prevalence