The General Deterrence of Driving While Intoxicated. Volume 1, System Analysis and Computer-Based Simulation

Summers, Leland G.; Harris, Douglas H., 1930- · 1978 · ROSA P / United States. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

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 1978 report by Summers and Harris, commissioned by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, addresses the problem of general deterrence for driving while intoxicated (DWI). The study was motivated by the recognition that specific deterrence—actual enforcement and sanctions applied to individual offenders—has limited impact due to the low probability of arrest and the vast size of the driving population. Consequently, the authors sought to understand how general deterrence, which influences the broader population through the threat of sanctions, could be optimized to reduce DWI trips and related accidents. To investigate this, the researchers developed a system model of DWI general deterrence based on utility theory. This framework posits that the decision to drive while intoxicated is a trade-off between the expected utility of the trip and the perceived risk of negative outcomes, such as arrest, conviction, or accident. The model incorporates three interconnected networks: driver-trip generation, adjudication of arrests, and information feedback regarding enforcement and sanctions. The authors implemented this model in a computer-based simulation program called DETER, which used fixed-time step simulation and an expected value Poisson flow model. Simulation experiments were conducted to assess the sensitivity of system parameters and evaluate the potential effectiveness of various countermeasures, including changes in enforcement visibility, adjudication procedures, and public information campaigns. Baseline parameters were calibrated using roadside breath test survey data and other empirical sources. The simulation results indicated that significant reductions in DWI trips and accidents must rely on general rather than specific deterrence. The study found that relatively small changes in the perceived enforcement rate could produce large changes in DWI behavior, provided that drivers were exposed to information altering their risk perception. Word-of-mouth feedback from apprehended drivers was found to be ineffective in reducing DWI. Conversely, increased enforcement visibility was only effective when combined with factors that drastically increased the perceived enforcement weight, such as prearrest screening laws. The most promising countermeasure identified was the widespread dissemination of public information regarding effective and consistent enforcement and adjudication actions. The simulation results aligned with historical data from the 1967 British Road Safety Act, which showed an initial sharp reduction in casualties followed by a return to pre-act levels as public perception of risk adjusted. The significance of this work lies in its identification of critical knowledge gaps and its provision of a framework for future research. The authors concluded that empirical evidence is urgently needed regarding drivers' perceived risk of enforcement, sanction awareness, the utility placed on DWI trips, and the nature of risk aversion. The report recommends large-scale studies to evaluate integrated deterrence programs and suggests that public information messages must be carefully designed to accurately convey the certainty and severity of sanctions. By establishing a system model and simulation tool, the study provides traffic safety managers with a method to guide future countermeasure development and prioritize research efforts aimed at bridging existing data gaps.

Key finding

Relatively small changes in perceived enforcement rate are likely to produce large changes in the number of DWI trips or related accidents, whereas word-of-mouth feedback from apprehended drivers does not significantly reduce DWI.

Methodology

modeling

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).

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.

• dui enforcement
• drowsy as impairment

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
• Empirical Findings: crash risk outcomes
• Theoretical Contribution: computational model