Wells-Parker E, Cosby P J, Landrum J W
Accid Anal Prev. 1986 Dec;18(6):443-53. doi: 10.1016/0001-4575(86)90018-7.
Comprehensive arrest histories were obtained for 353 DUI offenders who were referred to a probation and rehabilitation demonstration program. The average number of total offenses was 7.9, with 89% of all tracked offenders having more than one offense. Approximately 63% of all recorded offenses were other types of offenses besides DUI. The overall arrest history profile of the group suggested that many DUI offenders are habitual violators of other laws as well. To identify distinctive arrest profiles within the referral sample, a Q mode factor analysis followed by a discriminant function analysis was used to classify offenders into profile subgroups. Five distinctive subgroups emerged. A "low offense" group was characterized by the lowest average number of overall arrests and also contained all offenders with no arrest besides the index DUI arrest. A "mixed" group had a higher average number of total arrests than the "low offense" group and diverse types of offenses. A young "traffic" group was distinguished by many hazardous moving violations other than DUI. Two smaller and older groups--a "public drunkenness" group and a "license" group--had the highest average number of arrests including DUI, public drunkenness, license violations, equipment violations, disturbance arrests and assault arrests. These subgroups were found to differ on demographic variables and drinker status variables. The "public drunkenness" group was found to have the highest accident rate. Groups were compared to groups found in other cluster analyses. Also, treatment implications were discussed. It was suggested that treatment programs focusing exclusively on changing alcohol consumption behavior are not likely to reduce accident risk for some of the offender groups. For example, it was suggested that effective intervention for the "traffic" group should target driving behavior, whether drunk or sober, rather than focus exclusively on consumption behavior. Other alternatives are also discussed.
我们获取了353名被转介至缓刑与康复示范项目的酒后驾车违法者的全面逮捕记录。总犯罪次数的平均数为7.9次，所有被追踪的违法者中有89%有不止一次犯罪记录。在所有记录的犯罪中，约63%是除酒后驾车之外的其他类型犯罪。该群体的整体逮捕记录概况表明，许多酒后驾车违法者也是其他法律的惯犯。为了在转介样本中识别出独特的逮捕概况，我们使用了Q型因子分析，随后进行判别函数分析，将违法者分类为概况亚组。出现了五个独特的亚组。一个“低犯罪”组的特点是总体逮捕平均数最低，且包含所有除初次酒后驾车逮捕外没有其他逮捕记录的违法者。一个“混合”组的总逮捕平均数高于“低犯罪”组，且犯罪类型多样。一个年轻的“交通”组的特点是除酒后驾车外还有许多危险驾驶违规行为。另外两个规模较小且年龄较大的组——一个“公众醉酒”组和一个“执照”组——包括酒后驾车、公众醉酒、执照违规、设备违规、扰乱治安逮捕和攻击逮捕在内的逮捕平均数最高。这些亚组在人口统计学变量和饮酒者状态变量上存在差异。发现“公众醉酒”组的事故率最高。我们将这些组与其他聚类分析中发现的组进行了比较。此外，还讨论了治疗意义。有人指出，仅专注于改变饮酒行为的治疗项目不太可能降低某些违法者群体的事故风险。例如，有人建议，对“交通”组的有效干预应针对驾驶行为，无论是否醉酒，而不是仅专注于饮酒行为。还讨论了其他替代方案。
