Vanlaar Ward
Traffic Injury Research Foundation, 171 Nepean Street, Suite 200, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K2P 0B4.
Accid Anal Prev. 2008 May;40(3):1018-22. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2007.11.007. Epub 2007 Dec 18.
Drinking and driving road checks are often organized with either a clear prevention or repression objective in mind. The objective of a prevention strategy is to make as many people as possible believe that police officers are enforcing drinking and driving laws and that drinking drivers will most likely be caught. As such, targeting high traffic count road sites with high-visibility road checks is a priority because it serves to increase awareness of the enforcement activity. An alternative to this prevention approach is the "repression" approach that involves targeting times and places where the highest number of drinking drivers are to be expected. Rather than attempting to affect the subjective chance of getting caught, this approach seeks to increase the objective likelihood of getting caught; the aim is to apprehend as many drinking drivers as possible. Regardless of the chosen strategy, there is a need to understand how traffic count influences drinking and driving behaviour as traffic count may play a role in a police officer's choice of sites for a road check. The objective of this paper is to shed some light on this relationship between drinking and driving behaviour and traffic count. In this paper, data from a roadside survey, carried out in British Columbia in 2003, are used. A two-level logistic regression analysis was carried out with data from 2627 drivers coming from 48 different road sites to replicate a model that was previously obtained with comparable data from a Belgian roadside survey, also carried out in 2003. The present study successfully replicated the findings of the Belgian model, substantiating that the probability for drivers to be drinking and driving significantly decreases with an increasing level of traffic count. This supports the suggestion that drinking drivers avoid high traffic count road sites. The relevance of these findings with respect to organizing preventive or repressive road checks and possible confounding variables are discussed at the end of this paper.
酒后驾车路检通常是在明确的预防或打击目标下组织开展的。预防策略的目标是让尽可能多的人相信警察正在执行酒后驾车法律,而且酒驾者很可能会被抓获。因此,将高可见度的路检目标对准交通流量大的道路地点是优先事项,因为这有助于提高人们对执法活动的认识。这种预防方法的替代方案是“打击”方法,即针对预计酒驾者数量最多的时段和地点。这种方法不是试图影响被抓获的主观概率,而是寻求提高被抓获的客观可能性;目标是逮捕尽可能多的酒驾者。无论选择哪种策略,都有必要了解交通流量如何影响酒后驾车行为,因为交通流量可能在警察选择路检地点时发挥作用。本文的目的是阐明酒后驾车行为与交通流量之间的这种关系。本文使用了2003年在不列颠哥伦比亚省进行的路边调查数据。对来自48个不同道路地点的2627名司机的数据进行了二级逻辑回归分析,以复制之前用2003年在比利时进行的类似路边调查的可比数据获得的模型。本研究成功复制了比利时模型的结果,证实随着交通流量水平的增加,司机酒后驾车的概率显著降低。这支持了酒驾者会避开交通流量大的道路地点这一观点。本文结尾讨论了这些发现对于组织预防性或打击性路检的相关性以及可能的混杂变量。