What works (or doesn't) in a DUI court? An example of expedited case processing

Bouffard, Jeffrey A.; Bouffard, Leana A.

doi:10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2011.03.003

Cited by 16 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Specifically, autoregression ( p ) represents the lingering impacts of previous scores, differencing ( d ) indicates that the time series was differenced and the moving average ( q ) represents the lingering impacts of previous random shock (McDowall et al, 1980). Second, the time frame under study is divided by a discrete intervention (in this case, introduction of the 2007 RTA) into the observations occurring before and after the intervention (Bouffard and Bouffard, 2011). Therefore, the interrupted time series design provides a comparison between the pre- and the post-intervention segments of the time series while also taking any pre-existing pattern into consideration (Bouffard and Bouffard, 2011).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Second, the time frame under study is divided by a discrete intervention (in this case, introduction of the 2007 RTA) into the observations occurring before and after the intervention (Bouffard and Bouffard, 2011). Therefore, the interrupted time series design provides a comparison between the pre- and the post-intervention segments of the time series while also taking any pre-existing pattern into consideration (Bouffard and Bouffard, 2011). For instance, in looking for the impact of the 2007 RTA, it is possible that the number of DUI accidents was decreasing consistently prior to its enactment.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Past empirical studies on the effectiveness of deterrence-based DUI legislation and policies have shown mixed results (Bouffard and Bouffard, 2011; Deshapriya and Iwase, 1998; Houston and Richardson, 2004; Ross, 1984). Ross (1984) assessed the impact of the British Road Safety Act of 1967 on DUI fatalities and serious injuries on weekend nights in England and Wales.…”

Section: Theoretical Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Legislative actions

Leechaianan¹,

Chayapan²,

Khruakham³

2015

International Journal of Police Science & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Injuries and deaths resulting from driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) have become a major problem in Thailand. Specifically, the World Health Organisation (WHO) reported that Thailand's road-traffic death rate (per 100,000) was ranked third of 182 countries in 2013. To date, no research has examined whether the 2007 Road Traffic Act (RTA) has had a significant impact on DUI accidents since it was enacted. Accordingly, the purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of the 2007 RTA on DUI accident rates in Thailand. Using monthly DUI accident figures from 2005 to 2010 obtained from the Police Information and Technology Centre, the results from an interrupted time series design are used to indicate whether the new RTA is more effective than the previous Act in preventing drugand alcohol-related accidents in Thailand. The results supported the effectiveness of the 2007 RTA, but only in Region 10 (Bangkok), Region 1 (Nonthaburi) and Region 3 (Nakhon Ratchasima). However, it is important to highlight that even though the 2007 RTA was statistically significant in only three regions, the number of DUI accidents decreased in all 10 regions. Suggestions for future research are also provided.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theoretical Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Legislative actions

Leechaianan¹,

Chayapan²,

Khruakham³

2015

International Journal of Police Science & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There have been several evaluations of DWI and hybrid courts’ effectiveness (Eibner et al, 2006, MacDonald et al, 2007, Moore et al, 2008, Bouffard et al, 2010, Bouffard and Bouffard, 2011). In general, the outcome measure is re-arrest for DWI or for any offense.…”

Section: 0 Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of admission and treatment strategies of DWI courts on offender outcomes

Sloan

Chepke

Davis

et al. 2013

Accident Analysis & Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this study is to classify DWI courts on the basis of the mix of difficult cases participating in the court (casemix severity) and the amount of involvement between the court and participant (service intensity). Using our classification typology, we assess how casemix severity and service intensity are associated with program outcomes. We expected that holding other factors constant, greater service intensity would improve program outcomes while a relatively severe casemix would result in worse program outcomes. Methods The study used data from 8 DWI courts, 7 from Michigan and 1 from North Carolina. Using a 2-way classification system based on court casemix severity and program intensity, we selected participants in 1 of the courts, and alternatively 2 courts as reference groups. Reference group courts had relatively severe casemixes and high service intensity. We used propensity score matching to match participants in the other courts to participants in the reference group court programs. Program outcome measures were the probabilities of participants’: failing to complete the court’s program; increasing educational attainment; participants improving employment from time of program enrollment; and re-arrest. Results For most outcomes, our main finding was that higher service intensity is associated with better outcomes for court participants, as anticipated, but a court’s casemix severity was unrelated to study outcomes. Conclusions Our results imply that devoting more resources to increasing duration of treatment is productive in terms of better outcomes, irrespective of the mix of participants in the court’s program

show abstract

“…Bouffard and Bouffard () reported how both high fines and incarceration have not shown significant deterrent effects for DUI recidivism; however, states that have highly visible and publicized impaired‐driving enforcement programs, regardless of curriculum used, tend to have lower DUI rates (Bergen et al, ; Fell et al, 2014b). One example is the state of Georgia, which saw a 56% reduction in DUI offenses, not as a result of changing the state's model of education but simply by publicizing its impaired‐driving programs (Fell et al, 2014a).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%