User:MargaretRDonald/sandbox/Random Breath Testing

A theoretical model of the process of general deterrence is constructed, and tested against data collected as part of an evaluation of the impact of the introduction of random breath testing (rbt) in New South Wales, Australia in December 1982. The model entails a specification of the causal links between police activity and media publicity, and behaviour change. The model goes beyond utility theory in the conceptualisation of the processes whereby an individual may choose between driving after drinking and alternative modes of action. The data were derived from two surveys of the general population conducted within four months of the introduction of rbt, and included a longitudinal component (185 drinking motorists were reinterviewed after six weeks). Despite problems of measurement, the theoretical model was strongly supported for the short term impact of rbt. It is concluded that deterrence is an unstable process, and that the long term deterrent impact of measures like rbt depends mainly on the level of continual, visible police enforcement (a).

After reading the deterrence literature, particularly the work of H. Laurence Ross, I concluded in the late 1970's that many road accidents could be prevented through the whokhearted implementation of random breath testing (RBT). RBT is a system of drink‐drive law enforcement which aims to increase the perceived likelihood of apprehension through the use of mass breath testing techniques at roadblocks which are highly visible, are unpredictable in their locations and give the impression of ubiquity. As the result of public pressure, RBT was introduced in NSW in December 1982, with spectacular results. The law was intensively enforced and extensively advertised, partly due to the advocacy of researchers such as myself, but also because there was an acute political need for instant results. Since RBT is a difficult enforcement technique for police to sustain in effective form, researchers must strive to improve their understanding of what works, and remain in close contact with police, policy makers and politicians. Although this process is costly in terms of time and, possibly, academic ‘pay‐off’, it is essential if the fragile understanding of deterrence principles amongst these groups is not to lead to superficially attractive, but probably ineffective techniques such as low visibility mobile RBT.

Random breath testing (RBT) was introduced in New South Wales on 17th December, 1982 for a trial period of three years. RBT is considered to be responsible for the major part of a dramatic and sustained drop in the road toll since that date. There is no sign of the deterrent effect wearing off. The resulting savings to the community far outweigh any identifiable costs. The public overwhelmingly accepts RBT. The majority also support the present BAC level. It is concluded that to end RBT at the end of the three-year-trial would be to risk a return to pre-RBT levels of fatalities, injuries and crashes. However, judicious trials of variations of the present enforcement and publicity techniques may identify more efficient methods. It is recommended that the legislation permitting the random breath testing of drivers and riders be amended to remove the expiry date in the legislation in order to allow it to continue in effect indefinitely. It is further recommended that no change be made ot the existing legislation which makes it an offence to drive or ride a motor vehicle on a public street with a blood alcohol concentration at or above 0.05 grammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood.

Despite the dangers, many drivers continue to take risks when driving. This paper outlines an explanation of this risk-taking behavior and the failure of numerous fear-arousing messages to change the manner in which many people drive. Being an occupant in a car and learning to drive may be seen as analogous to systematic desensitization and flooding procedures, in which fear is extinguished and/or a response inconsistent with fear is learned. Once this procedure is complete the fear response is unlikely to be reinstated by messages pointing out possible dangers on the road, because the situations in which the messages are received are usually inappropriate, and many believe that they are superior drivers and therefore not at risk. News presentation of the huge road toll and multiple fatality crashes may only confirm to many people that they are better than average drivers since so many other people have been killed or seriously injured, and they, the superior drivers, have not. A prediction of this account is that driving confidence will increase with increasing age, through the greater on-road fear-reducing experience and increased exposure to the road toll. This prediction was examined in surveys of 2,963 Australian drivers, conducted as part of the evaluation of random breath testing. Respondents were asked to rate their ability as drivers compared with average, and to rate their ability to drive under the influence of alcohol. The overconfidence observed in Canada, Sweden, New Zealand, and the United States was identified in Australian drivers. The predicted increase in confidence with increasing age was supported up to the age of 40 years, after which confidence changed little. Confidence in ability to drive after consuming alcohol increased steadily with age. Finally, it was predicted that the introduction of random breath testing and the associated media campaign partly about the effects of alcohol (which was successful in reducing the road toll) would decrease confidence in ability to drive under the influence of alcohol. Comparison of survey data before and after the introduction of random breath testing did not support this prediction.

Since the introduction of random breath testing in Finland in 1977 the drinking and driving rate has halved, and there has been an appreciable reduction in the rates of death and injury from road accidents associated with drinking. The results of Finnish studies indicate that random breath testing deters social drinkers and detects problem drinkers. Problem drinkers are more likely o be driving in morning traffic, when vulnerable road users such as children are about, and are more likely to be detected by random breath testing than by any other police activity. Random breath testing is a popular measure and has not only saved lives but has paid for itself by savings in health service and other resources. Introducing random breath testing into Britain could save at least 400 lives a year. The main recommendation of the Blennerhassett report of 1976 - discretionary testing-is compared with the success of random breath testing in Finland.

On 17 December 1982, random breath testing (RBT) was introduced in New South Wales (NSW). RBT was a radical departure from previous drink-driving enforcement campaigns in NSW, general deterrent philosophy, in contrast to the traditional approach emphasizing the detection and punishment of offenders. The incorporation of nonlegal sanctions in the model highlights the importance of the physical and social environment. It has been assumed that in the absence of nonlegal norms, changes in behavior caused by a legal intervention must be due to the operation of deterrence. The need to invert one's perspective when studying drinking and driving is one reason why study of the offense can make a useful contribution to the development of the rational choice perspective. It could be argued that drinking and driving is one of a class of "less serious" offenses for which opportunities arise frequently as a natural part of social interaction rather than being sought out by the potential offender.

The study explored the impact of random breath testing (RBT) on the attitudes, perceptions, and self-reported behavior of motorists in the Australian state of Queensland. Particular attention was given to how exposure to RBT impacted motorists' perceived risk of apprehension and self-reported behavior, relative to other variables of interest such as alcohol consumption.

The study involved a telephone survey of 780 motorists drawn from throughout the state of Queensland. Participants were volunteers recruited from a random sample of all listed telephone numbers in the state, adjusted according to district population figures. The survey questionnaire collected information relating to the participants' socio-demographic characteristics, drinking and drunk driving behaviors, attitudes toward drunk driving and RBT, and experiences and perceptions of RBT. The analysis indicated that a large proportion of the sample had both observed RBT and been breath tested within the last six months and believed the practice served an important role in improving road safety. However, a considerable percentage also reported drunk driving at least once in the last six months without being detected, with further analysis indicating that the threat of apprehension associated with RBT did not appear to greatly influence their offending behavior. Rather, a higher frequency of alcohol consumption, combined with more favorable attitudes to drunk driving and lower levels of support for RBT, appeared to be associated with offending behavior.

While the results confirm the high levels of exposure to RBT achieved in Queensland, the direct impact of recent exposure on drunk driving behavior appears less important than other factors such as alcohol consumption and attitudes to drunk driving and RBT. Further research is required to better understand how recent and lifetime exposure to RBT impacts on motorists' perceived risk of apprehension and subsequent drunk driving behavior.

It is also noted that the relative effectiveness of RBT often fluctuates over time (Cameron &

Strang, 1982; Homel, 1988; Queensland Transport, 1987), and a number of factors have been identified that influence the impact of RBT as well as general drink driving levels e.g., law enforcement characteristics, economic conditions & level of supporting education. Essentially, the capacity of RBT to deter motorists from drink driving is heavily dependent upon promoting the perception that offenders will most likely be apprehended for the offence. However, researchers have noted that it is a difficult task to continually sustain the deterrent impact of drink driving countermeasures (Baum, 1999; Homel, 1988; Watson et al., 1994), as a growing body of research has demonstrated that individuals’ perceptions fluctuate over time (Green, 1989; Homel, 1988; Minor & Harry, 1982; Saltzman et al., 1982). At best, deterrence may be viewed as an unstable, dynamic process that requires continual effort such as exposure to RBT and media campaigns to ensure motorists are continually deterred from drink and drive (Homel, 1988). As a result, there is an ongoing need to investigate general motorists’ attitudes towards RBT and perceptions relating to apprehension, in order to determine what impact current RBT efforts have on individuals’ decisions to

drink and drive.

Time series results from four Australian states

The drink driving situation in Finland ESRA