No abstract

This study investigates whether drinker-drivers attributes are associated with imperfect rationality or irrationality. Using data from eight U.S. cities, we determine whether drinker-drivers differ from other drinkers in cognitive ability, ignorance of driving while intoxicated (DWI) laws, have higher rates of time preference, are time inconsistent, and lack self-control on other measures. We find that drinker-drivers are relatively knowledgeable about DWI laws and do not differ on two of three study measures of cognitive ability from other drinkers. Drinker-drivers are less prone to plan events involving drinking, e.g., selecting a designated driver in advance of drinking, and are more impulsive. Furthermore, we find evidence in support of hyperbolic discounting. In particular, relative to non-drinker-drivers, the difference between short- and long-term discount rates is much higher for drinker-drivers than for other drinkers. Implications of our findings for public policy, including incapacitation, treatment, and educational interventions, are discussed.

We test whether heavy or binge drinkers are overly optimistic about probabilities of adverse consequences from these activities or are relatively accurate about these probabilities. Using data from a survey in eight cities, we evaluate the relationship between subjective beliefs and drinking. We assess accuracy of beliefs about several outcomes of heavy/binge drinking: reduced longevity, liver disease onset, link between alcohol consumption and Driving While Intoxicated (DWI), probability of an accident after drinking, accuracy of beliefs about encountering intoxicated drivers on the road, and legal consequences of DWI—ranging from being stopped to receiving fines and jail terms. Overall, there is no empirical support for the optimism bias hypothesis. We do find that persons consuming a lot of alcohol tend to be more overconfident about their driving abilities and ability to handle alcohol. However, such overconfidence does not translate into over-optimism about consequences of high levels of alcohol consumption.

BackgroundEmpirical evidence has suggested that drug treatment courts (DTCs) reduce re-arrest rates. However, DTC program completion rates are low and little is known about the effectiveness of lower levels of program participation.ObjectivesWe examined how DTC program referral, enrollment without completion, and completion, affected re-arrest rates during a two-year follow-up.Research designWe used statewide North Carolina data from criminal courts merged with DTC data. Propensity score matching was used to select comparison groups based on demographic characteristics, criminal histories, and drug of choice (when available). Average treatment effects on the treated were computed.MeasuresDTC participation levels included referral without enrollment, (n = 2,174), enrollment without completion (n = 954), and completion (n = 747). Recidivism measured as re-arrest on a substance-related charge, on a violent offense charge not involving an allegation of substance abuse, and on any charge (excluding infractions) was examined by felony and misdemeanor status during a two-year follow-up period.ResultsRe-arrest rates were high, 53–76 percent. In general, re-arrest rates were similar for individuals who were referred but who did not enroll and a matched comparison group consisting of individuals who were not referred. In contrast, enrollees who did not complete had lower re-arrest rates than a matched group of individuals who were referred but did not enroll, for arrests on any charge, on any felony charge, and on substance-related charges (felonies and misdemeanors). Finally, relative to persons who enrolled but did not complete, those who completed had lower re-arrest rates on any charge, any felony charge, any misdemeanor charge, any substance-related charge, any substance-related misdemeanor or felony charge, and any violent felony charge.ConclusionsEnrolling in a DTC, even without completing, reduced re-arrest rates. Given the generally low DTC completion rate, this finding implies that only examining effects of completion underestimates the benefits of DTC programs.

Objective This study examined the intergenerational effects of parental conviction of a substance-related charge on children’s academic performance and, conditional on a conviction, whether completion of an adult drug treatment court (DTC) program was associated with improved school performance. Method State administrative data from North Carolina courts, birth records, and school records were linked for 2005–12. Math and reading end-of-grade test scores and absenteeism were examined for 5 groups of children, those with parents who: were not convicted on any criminal charge, were convicted on a substance-related charge and not referred by a court to a DTC, were referred to a DTC but did not enroll, enrolled in a DTC but did not complete, and completed a DTC program. Results Accounting for demographic and socioeconomic factors, the school performance of children whose parents were convicted of a substance-related offense was worse than that of children whose parents were not convicted on any charge. These differences were statistically significant but substantially reduced after controlling for socioeconomic characteristics, e.g., mother’s educational attainment. We found no evidence that parent participation in an adult DTC program led to improved school performance of their children. Conclusion While the children of convicted parents fared worse on average, much—but not all—of this difference was attributed to socioeconomic factors, with the result that parental conviction remained a risk factor for poorer school performance. Even though adult DTCs have been shown to have other benefits, we could detect no intergenerational benefit in improved school performance of their children.