考察酒驾与药驾在感知合法与非合法因素上的差异

IF 1.5 3区 社会学 Q2 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
V. Truelove, Benjamin Davey, N. Watson-Brown
{"title":"考察酒驾与药驾在感知合法与非合法因素上的差异","authors":"V. Truelove, Benjamin Davey, N. Watson-Brown","doi":"10.1177/26338076221114481","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Drink and drug driving countermeasures have several similarities, yet also have a number of differences. To improve the effectiveness of these countermeasures, it is important to delineate the perceptions of both legal and non-legal factors between drink driving and drug driving. This study aimed to understand these differences and how legal and non-legal factors uniquely contribute to future intentions to engage in these illegal behaviours. A total of 546 licensed drivers who have a history of using both alcohol and drugs (marijuana, MDMA, and/or ice/speed) responded to an online survey that included legal deterrence measures as well as established measures of non-legal factors for both drink driving and drug driving. The non-legal factors included the fear of physical loss (e.g., fear of injuring yourself or others), social loss (e.g., social disapproval) and internal loss (e.g., guilt). Participants were more likely to report drug driving compared to drink driving, with a higher perceived chance of being caught for drink driving and more experience avoiding punishment for drug driving. Physical loss to others and internal loss were higher for drink driving. For both models, punishment avoidance was a significant predictor. Certainty of apprehension and severity punishment were only significant deterrents for drug driving, not drink driving. The threat of physical loss to oneself was a significant deterrent for drink driving, not drug driving. The results show that legal and non-legal deterrents are rated as lower for drug driving compared to drink driving, yet legal sanctions are still a deterrent for drug driving. Further, non-legal countermeasures are needed for both drink and drug driving that increase drivers’ perceived fear of physical loss to others, internal loss, and social sanctions associated with the behaviours.","PeriodicalId":29902,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Criminology","volume":"56 1","pages":"59 - 77"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Examining the differences in perceived legal and non-legal factors between drink driving and drug driving\",\"authors\":\"V. Truelove, Benjamin Davey, N. Watson-Brown\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/26338076221114481\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Drink and drug driving countermeasures have several similarities, yet also have a number of differences. To improve the effectiveness of these countermeasures, it is important to delineate the perceptions of both legal and non-legal factors between drink driving and drug driving. This study aimed to understand these differences and how legal and non-legal factors uniquely contribute to future intentions to engage in these illegal behaviours. A total of 546 licensed drivers who have a history of using both alcohol and drugs (marijuana, MDMA, and/or ice/speed) responded to an online survey that included legal deterrence measures as well as established measures of non-legal factors for both drink driving and drug driving. The non-legal factors included the fear of physical loss (e.g., fear of injuring yourself or others), social loss (e.g., social disapproval) and internal loss (e.g., guilt). Participants were more likely to report drug driving compared to drink driving, with a higher perceived chance of being caught for drink driving and more experience avoiding punishment for drug driving. Physical loss to others and internal loss were higher for drink driving. For both models, punishment avoidance was a significant predictor. Certainty of apprehension and severity punishment were only significant deterrents for drug driving, not drink driving. The threat of physical loss to oneself was a significant deterrent for drink driving, not drug driving. The results show that legal and non-legal deterrents are rated as lower for drug driving compared to drink driving, yet legal sanctions are still a deterrent for drug driving. Further, non-legal countermeasures are needed for both drink and drug driving that increase drivers’ perceived fear of physical loss to others, internal loss, and social sanctions associated with the behaviours.\",\"PeriodicalId\":29902,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Criminology\",\"volume\":\"56 1\",\"pages\":\"59 - 77\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Criminology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/26338076221114481\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Criminology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26338076221114481","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

酒后驾车和毒驾对策有几个相似之处,但也有一些不同之处。为了提高这些对策的有效性,重要的是要明确酒后驾驶和毒驾之间的法律和非法律因素。这项研究旨在了解这些差异,以及法律和非法律因素如何独特地影响未来从事这些非法行为的意图。共有546名有酗酒和吸毒史(大麻、摇头丸和/或冰/速)的持照司机对一项在线调查做出了回应,该调查包括法律威慑措施以及针对酒后驾驶和毒驾的非法律因素的既定措施。非法律因素包括对身体损失的恐惧(例如,对伤害自己或他人的恐惧)、社会损失(例如,社会不满)和内心损失(例如内疚)。与酒后驾驶相比,参与者更有可能报告毒驾,他们认为酒后驾驶被抓的几率更高,并且有更多的经验避免因毒驾而受到惩罚。酒后驾驶对他人的身体损失和内部损失更高。对于这两种模型,避免惩罚是一个重要的预测因素。逮捕的确定性和严厉惩罚只是对毒驾的重要威慑,而不是酒后驾驶。对自己造成身体损失的威胁是对酒后驾驶的重要威慑,而不是对毒驾的威慑。结果表明,与酒后驾驶相比,法律和非法律威慑对毒驾的评价较低,但法律制裁仍然对毒驾具有威慑作用。此外,酒后驾驶和毒驾都需要非法律对策,这会增加驾驶员对他人身体损失、内部损失和与这些行为相关的社会制裁的恐惧。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Examining the differences in perceived legal and non-legal factors between drink driving and drug driving
Drink and drug driving countermeasures have several similarities, yet also have a number of differences. To improve the effectiveness of these countermeasures, it is important to delineate the perceptions of both legal and non-legal factors between drink driving and drug driving. This study aimed to understand these differences and how legal and non-legal factors uniquely contribute to future intentions to engage in these illegal behaviours. A total of 546 licensed drivers who have a history of using both alcohol and drugs (marijuana, MDMA, and/or ice/speed) responded to an online survey that included legal deterrence measures as well as established measures of non-legal factors for both drink driving and drug driving. The non-legal factors included the fear of physical loss (e.g., fear of injuring yourself or others), social loss (e.g., social disapproval) and internal loss (e.g., guilt). Participants were more likely to report drug driving compared to drink driving, with a higher perceived chance of being caught for drink driving and more experience avoiding punishment for drug driving. Physical loss to others and internal loss were higher for drink driving. For both models, punishment avoidance was a significant predictor. Certainty of apprehension and severity punishment were only significant deterrents for drug driving, not drink driving. The threat of physical loss to oneself was a significant deterrent for drink driving, not drug driving. The results show that legal and non-legal deterrents are rated as lower for drug driving compared to drink driving, yet legal sanctions are still a deterrent for drug driving. Further, non-legal countermeasures are needed for both drink and drug driving that increase drivers’ perceived fear of physical loss to others, internal loss, and social sanctions associated with the behaviours.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Criminology
Journal of Criminology CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信