Deterring Drunk Driving: Beliefs, Preferences, Outcomes, and Welfare Implications

描述（由申请人提供）：如何减少酒后驾车和改善道路安全工作的法律还不是很清楚。这项为期4年的研究考察了司机的决策，因为它受到执法和保险公司的影响，并根据我们的实证研究结果，评估了具体的政策干预措施。我们将进行/分析4项调查的数据；(1)北卡罗来纳州罗利和希克里市1600名18-54岁的成年人；费城和宾夕法尼亚州的威尔克斯-巴里；密尔沃基和拉克罗斯，威斯康星州；西雅图和华盛顿州的亚基马；（二）执法机构16个；(3)多达60家汽车保险公司和(4)60名律师。我们将从政府来源和我们对个人的调查中获得司机记录的信息。在目标1“个体风险感知的准确性”中，我们比较了个体对饮酒/驾驶结果的主观信念与来自我们的调查、州和其他次要来源的客观数据，并评估了准确性差异的来源。在目标2“风险认知和其他因素对酒后驾驶行为的影响”中，我们评估了(1)主观信念和(2)其他因素（如时间和风险偏好、人身伤害的内部成本、对他人的利他主义、认知能力、人口特征和收入）对酒后驾驶行为的影响。第三部分“信息不对称、逆向选择和道德风险”的重点是机动车保险市场。许多人自愿购买超过强制责任限额的保险。司机可能比保险公司更了解他/她的酒精摄入量、驾驶习惯和能力。我们的分析将有助于使用新的和更丰富的数据集评估这些问题；我们将有优势设计问卷来解决这些问题。逆向选择和道德风险的经济分析包括提案中描述的四个步骤。我们还对政策选择进行法律分析，以减少逆向选择的不利影响。在目标4“福利影响和政策分析”中，我们估计了一个关于酒后驾驶行为和保险合同选择的两阶段模型，该模型将用于评估信息不对称和特定公共政策变化的福利成本。我们的分析方法结合了对实际选择的观察数据和对个人调查得出的行为反应。至少，我们将评估的政策是：(1)增加对酒后驾车法律的执行，这反映在逮捕概率上；（二）增加强制量刑；(3).增加了金币设置的经验等级；(4)开展关于酒后驾车与事故之间关系的宣传活动。我们预计至少要写9篇论文。与公共健康相关：酒精滥用在美国和其他国家都是一个主要的社会问题。虽然有很多法律法规，但人们对酒后驾车造成后果的可能性的主观或客观看法却知之甚少。本研究考察了驾驶员复杂的决策过程，因为它受到执法和保险公司的影响，并基于实证结果，评估了具体的公共政策干预及其有效减少酒后驾驶行为的能力。

DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): How laws to reduce DWI and improve roadway safety work is not well understood. This 4-year study examines decision making of drivers as it is affected by law enforcement, and insurers, and based on our empirical findings, evaluates specific policy interventions. We will conduct/analyze data from 4 surveys; (1) 1,600 adults aged 18-54 in Raleigh and Hickory, NC; Philadelphia and Wilkes-Barre, PA; Milwaukee and La Crosse, WI; and Seattle and Yakima, WA; (2) 16 law enforcement agencies; (3) up to 60 automobile insurers and (4) 60 attorneys. We will obtain information on driver records from government sources and our survey of individuals. In Aim 1, Accuracy of Individual Risk Perceptions, we compare individuals' subjective beliefs about outcomes of drinking/driving, with objective data from our surveys, state, and other secondary sources and assess sources of variation in accuracy. In Aim 2, Effects of Risk Perceptions and Other Factors on Drinking and Driving Behaviors, we assess impacts of (1) subjective beliefs and (2) other factors (e.g., time and risk preference, internal cost of personal injury, altruism toward others, cognitive ability, demographic characteristics and income on drinking/driving behaviors. The focus of Aim 3, Asymmetric Information, Adverse Selection and Moral Hazard is on the market for motor vehicle insurance. Many people voluntarily purchase insurance above compulsory liability limits. The driver potentially knows much more about his/her alcohol consumption, driving habits and abilities than do insurers. Our analysis will contribute to assessing these issues using new and richer data sets; we will have the advantage of designing our questionnaire to address these issues. The economic analysis of adverse selection and moral hazard consists of 4 steps described in the proposal. We also perform a legal analysis of policy options to reduce the adverse effects of adverse selection. In Aim 4, Welfare Implications and Policy Analyses, we estimate a 2-stage model of drinking and driving behavior and insurance contract choice to be used to assess welfare costs of asymmetric information and specific public policy changes. Our analytic approach combines use of observational data on actual choices with behavioral responses elicited by our survey of individuals. At a minimum, the policies we will evaluate are: (1) increased enforcement of DWI laws as reflected in the arrest probability; (2). increased mandatory sentences; (3). increased experience rating in premium setting; and (4) an information campaign regarding how drinking and driving are related to accidents. We anticipate writing at least 9 papers. PUBLIC HEALTH RELEVANCE: Alcohol abuse is a major social problem in the U.S. as well as in other countries. Numerous laws and regulations exist, but little is known about the subjective or objective beliefs about the probability of consequences resulting from drinking and driving. This research examines the complex decision making process of drivers as it is affected by law enforcement and insurers, and based on the empirical findings, evaluates specific public policy interventions and their ability to effectively reduce drinking and driving behavior.