Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Evaluation Review
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Grube, J. W.
Right arrow Articles by Kearney, K. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Grube, J. W.
Right arrow Articles by Kearney, K. A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Other

A "Mandatory" Jail Sentence for Drinking and Driving

Joel W. Grube

Economic and Social Research Institute Dublin, Ireland

Kathleen A. Kearney

Washington State University

The Yakima (Washington State) Drinking and Driving Project was intended to change public attitudes toward drinking and driving, and to decrease its incidence by implement ing a two-day jail sentence for persons convicted of driving while intoxicated. This evaluation was undertaken to assess the implementation and impact of the Yakima Project. Data were obtained through surveys of the public and of law enforcement personnel and from official accident, Breathalyzer,® and court records. It was found that the jail sentence was well received by the law enforcement officers and by the public, and possibly led to changes in public attitudes. However, it did not reduce alcohol involvement in accidents and thus apparently did not decrease the incidence of drinking and driving. Lack of public awareness and variability in judicial enforcement were identified as factors that may have contributed to this failure.

Evaluation Review, Vol. 7, No. 2, 235-246 (1983)
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X8300700205
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Crime DelinquencyHome page
B. J. Morse and D. S. Elliott
Effects of Ignition Interlock Devices on DUI Recidivism: Findings from a Longitudinal Study in Hamilton County, Ohio
Crime Delinquency, April 1, 1992; 38(2): 131 - 157.
[Abstract]

Home page
 Crime DelinquencyHome page
G. R. Wheeler and R. V. Hissong
Effects of Criminal Sanctions on Drunk Drivers: Beyond Incarceration
Crime Delinquency, January 1, 1988; 34(1): 29 - 42.
[Abstract]