This project uses a representative U.S. population sample and Generalized Structural Equation Modeling (GSEM) to explore the deterrence of driving under the influence (DUI) and it’s moderation by the differential deterrability of problem and non-problem drinkers. As hypothesized, the results indicate that personal and vicarious experiences with punishment and punishment avoidance were significant predictors of punishment certainty and self-reported DUI. Significant heterogeneity in both the formulation of perceived certainty of punishment and the relationship between this perception and DUI also exists between problem and non-problem drinkers. Most notably, certainty of punishment was a more robust negative predictor of DUI offending for problem drinkers, and prior punishment appears to have little effect on perceptions of punishment certainty for problem drinkers.
AkersR. L. (2009). Social learning and social structure: A general theory of crime and deviance. Transaction Books.
2.
AllisonP. D. (2001). Missing data (Vol. 136). SAGE Publications.
3.
AndenaesJ. (1974). Punishment and detterence. University of Michigan Press.
4.
AnwarS.LoughranT. A. (2011). Testing a Bayesian learning theory of deterrence among serious juvenile offenders. Criminology, 49(3), 667–698.
5.
ApelR. (2013). Sanctions, perceptions, and crime: Implications for criminal deterrence. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 29(1), 67–101.
6.
ApplegateB. K.CullenF. T.BartonS. M.RichardsP. J.Lanza-KaduceL.LinkB. G. (1995). Public support for drunk-driving countermeasures: Social policy for saving lives. Crime and Delinquency, 41(2), 171–190.
7.
BertelliA. M.RichardsonL. E.Jr, (2008). The behavioral impact of drinking and driving laws. Policy Studies Journal, 36(4), 545–569.
8.
BollenK.LennoxR. (1991). Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 110(2), 305–314.
9.
BouffardJ. A.ExumM. L. (2013). Rational choice beyond the classroom: Decision making in offenders versus college students. Criminal Justice Journal, 41(6), 438–447.
10.
BouffardJ. A.ExumM. L.NiebuhrN. (2018). Examining the stability and predictors of deterrability across multiple offense types within a sample of convicted felons. Criminal Justice Journal, 57, 76–88.
11.
BouffardJ. A.NiebuhrN.ExumM. L. (2017). Examining specific deterrence effects on DWI among serious offenders. Crime and Delinquency, 63(14), 1923–1945.
12.
BushB.ShawS.ClearyP.DelbancoT. L.AronsonM. D. (1987). Screening for alcohol abuse using the CAGE questionnaire. The American Journal of Medicine, 82(2), 231–235.
13.
CohenL. E.FelsonM. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review, 44, 588–608.
14.
DeMicheleM.LoweN. C.PayneB. K. (2014). A criminological approach to explain chronic drunk driving. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 39(2), 292–314.
FreemanJ.WatsonB. (2006). An application of Stafford and Warr’s reconceptualisation of deterrence to a group of recidivist drink drivers. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 38(3), 462–471.
18.
GoodfellowM.KilgoreC. (2014). DUI offenders’ beliefs about DUI statutes and DUI law enforcement. Journal of Drug Issues, 44(3), 269–280.
19.
GreenbergM. D.MorralA. R.JainA. K. (2004). How Can repeat drunk drivers be influenced to change? Analysis of the association between drunk driving and DUI recidivists’ attitudes and beliefs. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 65(4), 460–463.
20.
GreenbergM. D.MorralA. R.JainA. K. (2005). Drink-driving and DUI recidivists’ attitudes and beliefs: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 66(5), 640–647.
HoyleJ.MillerB. L.StognerJ. M.PosickC.BlackwellB. S. (2018). Analyzing predictors of drinking and driving among gender cohorts within a college sample. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 43(4), 754–767.
23.
JacobsB. A. (2010). Deterrence and deterrability. Criminology, 48(2), 417–441.
24.
JacobsB. A.WrightR. (2006). Street justice: Retaliation in the criminal underworld. Cambridge University Press.
25.
KlineR. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Publications.
26.
Lanza-KaduceL. (1988). Perceptual deterrence and drinking and driving among college students. Criminology, 26(2), 321–341.
27.
LernerB. H. (2011). One for the road: Drunk driving since 1900. Johns Hopkins University Press.
28.
LochnerL. (2007). Individual perceptions of the criminal justice system. American Economic Review, 97(1), 444–460.
29.
LoughranT. A.PogarskyG.PiqueroA. R.PaternosterR. (2012a). Re-examining the functional form of the certainty effect in deterrence theory. Justice Quarterly, 29(5), 712–741.
30.
LoughranT. A.PiqueroA. R.FaganJ.MulveyE. P. (2012b). Differential deterrence: Studying heterogeneity and changes in perceptual deterrence among serious youthful offenders. Crime and Delinquency, 58(1), 3–27.
31.
LoughranT. A. (2019). Behavioral criminology and public policy. Criminology & Public Policy, 18(4), 737–758.
32.
LoughranT. A.PaternosterR.PiqueroA. R.PogarskyG. (2011). On ambiguity In perceptions of risk: Implications for criminal decision making and deterrence. Criminology, 49(4), 1029–1061.
33.
LoughranT. A.PaternosterR.ThomasK. J. (2014). Incentivizing responses to self-report questions in perceptual deterrence studies: An investigation of the validity of deterrence theory using Bayesian truth serum. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 30(4), 677–707.
34.
MacCounR. J. (1993). Drugs and the law: a psychological analysis of drug prohibition. Psychological Bulletin, 113(3), 497–512.
35.
MatsuedaR. L.KreagerD. A.HuizingaD. (2006). Deterring delinquents: A rational choice model of theft and violence. American Sociological Review, 71(1), 95–122.
36.
MaxsonC. L.MatsudaK. N.HenniganK. (2011). “Deterrability” among gang and nongang juvenile offenders: Are gang members more (or less) deterrable than other juvenile offenders?Crime and Delinquency, 57(4), 516–543.
37.
MidgetteG.LoughranT. A.TahamontS. (2021). The impact of ambiguity-induced error in offender decision-making: Evidence from the field. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224278211000088
38.
NaginD. S.PaternosterR. (1993). Enduring individual differences and rational choice theories of crime. Law & Society Review, 27(3), 467.
39.
NaginD. S.PogarskyG. (2001). Integrating celerity, impulsivity, and extralegal sanction threats into a model of general deterrence: Theory and evidence. Criminology, 39(4), 865–892.
OsgoodD. W. (2000). Poisson-based regression analysis of aggregate crime rates. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 16(1), 21–43.
42.
PaternosterR.BrameR.MazerolleP.PiqueroA. (1998). Using the correct statistical test for the equality of regression coefficients. Criminology, 36(4), 859–866.
43.
PaternosterR.PiqueroA. (1995). Reconceptualizing deterrence: An empirical test of personal and vicarious experiences. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 32(3), 251–286.
44.
PaxtonP.HippJ. R.Marquart-PyattS.Marquart-PyattS. T. (2011). Nonrecursive models: Endogeneity, reciprocal relationships, and feedback loops (Vol. 168). SAGE Publications.
45.
PickettJ. T. (2018). Using behavioral economics to advance deterrence research and improve crime policy: Some illustrative experiments. Crime and Delinquency, 64(12), 1636–1659.
46.
PickettJ. T.BarnesJ. C.WilsonT.Patrick RocheS. (2020). Prospect theory and criminal choice: Experiments testing framing, reference dependence, and decision weights. Justice Quarterly, 37(6), 1140–1168.
47.
PickettJ. T.RocheS. P.PogarskyG. (2018). Toward a bifurcated theory of emotional deterrence. Criminology, 56(1), 27–58.
48.
PiqueroA.PaternosterR. (1998). An application of Stafford and Warr’s reconceptualization of deterrence to drinking and driving. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 35(1), 3–39.
49.
PiqueroA. R.PaternosterR.PogarskyG.LoughranT. (2011). Elaborating the individual difference component in deterrence theory. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 7, 335–360.
50.
PiqueroA. R.PiqueroN. L.GertzM.BrattonJ.LoughranT. A. (2012). Sometimes ignorance is bliss: Investigating citizen perceptions of the certainty and severity of punishment. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 37(4), 630–646.
51.
PiqueroA. R.PogarskyG. (2002). Beyond Stafford and Warr’s reconceptualization of deterrence: Personal and vicarious experiences, impulsivity, and offending behavior. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 39(2), 153–186.
52.
PiqueroA.TibbettsS. (1996). Specifying the direct and indirect effects of low self-control and situational factors in offenders’ decision making: Toward a more complete model of rational offending. Justice Quarterly, 13(3), 481–510.
53.
PogarskyG. (2002). Identifying “deterrable” offenders: Implications for research on deterrence. Justice Quarterly, 19(3), 431–452.
54.
PogarskyG.KimK.PaternosterR. (2005). Perceptual change in the national youth survey: Lessons for deterrence theory and offender decision-making. Justice Quarterly, 22(1), 1–29.
55.
PogarskyG.PiqueroA. R. (2003). Can punishment encourage offending? Investigating the “resetting” effect. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 40(1), 95–120.
56.
PogarskyG.PiqueroA. R.PaternosterR. (2004). Modeling change in perceptions about sanction threats: The neglected linkage in deterrence theory. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 20(4), 343–369.
57.
PogarskyG.RocheS. P.PickettJ. T. (2018). Offender decision-making in criminology: Contributions from behavioral economics. Annual Review of Criminology, 1(1), 379–400.
58.
PrattT. C.CullenF. T. (2005). Assessing macro-level predictors and theories of crime: A meta-analysis. Crime and Justice, 32, 373–450.
59.
PrattT. C.CullenF. T.BlevinsK. R.DaigleL. E.MadensenT. D. (2006). The empirical status of deterrence theory: A meta-analysis. Taking Stock: The Status of Criminological Theory, 15, 367–396.
60.
SampsonR. J.CohenJ. (1988). Deterrent effects of the police on crime: A replication and theoretical extension. Law & Society Review, 22, 163–189.
61.
ShoverN. (2018). Great pretenders: Pursuits and careers of persistent thieves. Routledge.
62.
SitrenA. H.ApplegateB. K. (2007). Testing the deterrent effects of personal and vicarious experience with punishment and punishment avoidance. Deviant Behavior, 28(1), 29–55.
63.
StaffordM. C.WarrM. (1993). A reconceptualization of general and specific deterrence. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30(2), 123–135.
64.
StringerR.WhiteG.GaineyR.TriplettR. (2019). It Is more than just alcohol: A criminological perspective on routine drinking activities, opportunity, and alcohol-related crashes. Journal of Drug Issues, 49(4), 718–738.
65.
StringerR. J. (2020). Drunk driving and deterrence: Exploring the reconceptualized deterrence hypothesis and self-reported drunk driving. Journal of Crime and Justice, 44(3), 1–16.
66.
SykesG. M.MatzaD. (1957). Techniques of neutralization: A theory of delinquency. American Sociological Review, 22, 664–670.
67.
ThomasK. J.NguyenH. (2020). Status gains versus status losses: Loss aversion and deviance. Justice Quarterly. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2020.1856400
68.
ThomasK. J.LoughranT. A.PiqueroA. R. (2013). Do individual characteristics explain variation in sanction risk updating among serious juvenile offenders? Advancing the logic of differential deterrence. Law and Human Behavior, 37(1), 10–21.
69.
UrbanL. S. (2009). Identifying “Deterrable” offenders in a sample of active juvenile offenders. Southwest Journal of Criminal Justice, 6(1), 79–99.
70.
WilsonT.PaternosterR.LoughranT. (2017). Direct and indirect experiential effects in an updating model of deterrence: A research note. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 54(1), 63–77.
71.
WoodP. B. (2007). Exploring the positive punishment effect among incarcerated adult offenders. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 31(2), 8–22.
72.
WorrallJ. L.ElsN.PiqueroA. R.TenEyckM. (2014). The moderating effects of informal social control in the sanctions-compliance nexus. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 39(2), 341–357.
73.
WrightR. T.DeckerS. H. (1996). Burglars on the job: Streetlife and residential break-ins. Northeastern University Press.
74.
YuJ. (2000). Punishment and alcohol problems: Recidivism among drinking-driving offenders. Criminal Justice Journal, 28(4), 261–270.
75.
YuJ.EvansP. C.ClarkL. P. (2006). Alcohol addiction and perceived sanction risks: Deterring drinking drivers. Criminal Justice Journal, 34(2), 165–174.
76.
ZaloshnjaE.MillerT. R.BlincoeL. J. (2013). Costs of alcohol-involved crashes, United States, 2010. Annals of Advances in Automotive Medicine, 57, 3–12.
77.
ZimringF.HawkinsG. (1968). Deterrence and marginal groups. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 5(2), 100–114.
78.
ZimringF.HawkinsG. (1973). Deterrence: The legal threat in crime control. University of Chicago Press.
