Click for next page ( 10

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 9
9 probability of being imposed, and have a high degree of in- The following percentage of countermeasures are rated trusiveness (i.e., involve a real amount of money or time) are Proven or Likely to work in each class of countermeasures: most likely to work. If there is low intrusiveness, if sanctions are not well known to violators, are unlikely to be applied, or Sixteen percent of Class 1: Voluntary Action; if the penalty is not very meaningful, success is unlikely. Fifty-three percent of Class 2: Laws, Regulations, Policies; Seventy-two percent of Class 3: Laws Plus Enhancements; and Proven Sixty-seven percent of Class 4: Sanctions and Treatments. Aggressive driving, speeding penalties (e.g., suspension, warning letters); By topic area, there are differences in expected effective- Restrictions on plea bargains; ness. Effectiveness is most likely in the occupant restraint Court monitoring; group where 82% of the countermeasures are rated Proven Mandatory attendance at alcohol treatment; or Likely; followed by alcohol (67%); aggressive driving/ Close monitoring of DUIs; speeding (50%); young drivers (38%); bicycles (33%); pedes- Alcohol interlocks; trians (30%); elderly drivers (14%); motorcycles (11%); and Brief interventions--alcohol; distracted/fatigued drivers (none at this time). License plate impoundment; How effective are those countermeasures rated as Proven or Vehicle immobilization; and Likely? Ideally, for all countermeasures rated as Proven, and for Vehicle impoundment. many rated as Likely, it would be possible to derive a numerical estimate of the effect size, the expected percentage reduction in injuries. However, it is not always possible to estimate this num- Likely ber. Of the 47 countermeasures rated as Proven or Likely, about Increased belt use law penalties and half of the outcomes relate not to reductions in crashes or in- Simplifying and streamlining DUI statutes. juries, but to some intermediate measure (e.g., reductions in re- cidivism, increases in arrests or convictions, decreased drinking, increases in seat belt use). It is possible to estimate the impact of Unknown/Uncertain/Unlikely increases in seat belt use to decreases in injuries, but for many Vehicle forfeiture (+); other intermediate measures, there is no credible way to do so. GDL penalties (0); There also are a few cases where the expected effect relates to Driving under the influence (DUI) fines (0); crashes or injuries, but not enough information is available to DUI jail (0); extract a numerical estimate of the effect. High BAC sanctions (+); and In addition to the effect size, there are other important DWI (driving while intoxicated) courts (+). factors in determining the overall impact of any countermea- sure. One of these factors is the size of the population affected. For example, a measure affecting the general population Summary can have more impact than one affecting a specific subgroup Overall, 45% of the 104 countermeasures are considered (e.g., teenage drivers only). Another is the expected duration of effective (33% proven; 12% likely). By comparison, the other the effect. For example, although the effects of laws can vary 55% are less likely to work. This assessment is based on the over time, depending on such factors as the amount of public- fact that evidence for effectiveness is uncertain or unknown ity and enforcement, their permanence gives them an advantage and/or the criteria for what is likely to work are not met compared with programs that are one-time efforts. Duration (52%), or because research indicates that these countermea- can also refer to the length of time the positive effects of a pol- sures increase crashes (3%). icy last on individuals affected, for example, license suspension.