<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>Effectiveness of Vehicle Impoundment for High-Range Speeding Offences in Victoria, Australia</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1724372</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Speeding behavior has been shown to account for a large number of deaths and serious injuries on Australian roads. Vehicle impoundment is one countermeasure which has been implemented to discourage drivers from engaging in high-range speeding. Despite this countermeasure being used as a sanction in all Australian jurisdictions to combat high-range speeding offences, limited research has examined the effectiveness of vehicle impoundments in Australia. The purpose of this research was to examine the effectiveness of vehicle impoundment for high-range speeding offences on subsequent offence and crash rates. Data were collected from drivers with an eligible excessive speeding offence in Victoria, Australia between 1 July 2006 and 31 December 2014. During this time, there were 17,440 impoundment eligible offences, 6,883 (41.8 %) of which resulted in vehicle impoundment. The analysis revealed that drivers who had a vehicle impounded were more likely to be male, younger, hold a probationary license, and to have a court offence. In terms of the effectiveness of vehicle impoundment, among high-range offenders, re-offence rates for those who had their vehicle impounded were statistically significantly lower for all license periods compared with offenders who did not have their vehicle impounded. There was evidence of an effect of impoundment on reducing speeding re-offence rates during the impoundment period as well as some evidence that the impact of license suspension was greater for those who experienced impoundment. Given that vehicle impoundment is a sanction which aims to discourage and/or incapacitate drivers from engaging in on-road risk taking behavior, in this case high-range speeding behavior, the longer-term positive effects of this sanction may assist with the on-going effort to reduce on-road risk taking behaviors.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2020 09:38:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1724372</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Key Questions that Help Motivate DWI Probationers</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1587028</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This publication by the Working Group on DWI System Improvements discusses ways probation professionals can motivate individuals who are on probation for driving while impaired (DWI) to change their attitudes and behaviors and ultimately prevent recidivism. Topics include assessments, positive and negative reinforcement, relationship between probation officer and probationer, and motivational interviewing.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jul 2019 07:56:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1587028</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Persistent DWI Offender: Policy &amp; Practice Considerations</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1587026</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In this publication, the Working Group on DWI System Improvements presents strategies for addressing repeat driving while impaired (DWI) offenders. Strategies suggested include: integrating research into policies and practices; using proven assessment tools; identifying problem behaviors and strengths of the individuals involved; assigning realistic and non-disruptive supervision to probationers; utilizing technological tools such as alcohol-monitoring technology; and being aware of appropriate treatment alternatives.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jul 2019 07:56:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1587026</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Pilot study: Probation model with alcohol interlocks</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1288046</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In the US and several countries in Europe, alcohol interlocks have been used in DUI (driving under influence)-offender programs in order to support offenders through the period of rehabilitation. The Austrian Road Safety Board (KFV) has started a pilot project for a probation model. In all the pilot projects with alcohol interlocks, the KFV cooperates closely with the BMVIT, the Federal Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology. The goal of the probation model is to reduce the number of drink-driving offences.  The specific goal of the pilot study was to test the process from installation to removal of the device with all its practical aspects and by this conduct a feasibility study. Thirty drivers were driving for 6 months in four different regions of Austria with an alcohol interlock device installed in their cars. The drivers were monitored and supported by mentors that read out the data and had a supervisory session with the drivers. All drivers had committed a DUI-offence within the last four years. The participants showed a high acceptance of the device, the handling was mostly described as easy. The device was seen as a good alternative to the revocation of the driver’s license and supportive in separating drinking and driving. The continuous support by the mentors was seen as very important and the connection between the read out and the mentoring in order to really understand the data and get support throughout the process of the probation model was confirmed by all participants.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2014 13:39:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1288046</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A study of conflict resolution in the criminal justice system : police and probation</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1221561</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Study sites: Nassau County, Albuquerque and San Jose.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Nov 2012 13:56:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1221561</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>N.J. Teen Decals Boost Citations, Not Compliance</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1132789</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This article reports on a study undertaken by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) to investigate the impact of a New Jersey law intended to help police enforce graduated licensing restrictions.  The law requires young drivers to display a special red reflective decal on their vehicle’s license plate when they drive.  The study found that the law is unpopular and often ignored, but citations for graduated licensing violations went up after the law went into effect, suggesting that the decals are resulting in better enforcement.  In addition to mandating decals, the law also moved the curfew for teen drivers from midnight to 11pm and did away with a sibling exception to the 1-passenger limit.  Proponents of the law say that teens are more likely to comply with restrictions if they know they can be readily identified.  The study consisted of telephone interviews with parents of probationary license holders and parents of learner’s permit holders, as well as teens with probationary licenses.  Parents commonly (more than 75%) opposed the decals, for reasons including concerns about teens being profile or targeted by other drivers, or drawing negative attention to teen drivers.  Observations done at high schools in 4 different counties found low rates of decal use. Readers are referred to a copy of the research article, available by emailing publications@iihs.org.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2012 12:18:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1132789</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>An Evaluation of Intensive Supervision Programs for Serious DWI Offenders</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1125332</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Intensive Supervision Programs (ISPs) for offenders convicted of driving while intoxicated (DWI) vary considerably around the United States. There are State “systems” that provide standard guidelines to counties and local communities in the State, and there are numerous local county and community programs that appear promising in reducing DWI recidivism. The authors prepared case studies for two State programs (Nebraska and Wisconsin), four individual area ISPs (“Staggered Sentencing for Multiple DWI Convicted Offenders” in Minnesota; “Serious Offender Program” in Nevada; “DWI Enforcement Program” in New York; and “DUII Intensive Supervision Program” (DISP) in Oregon) and two rural programs (“24/7 Sobriety Project” in South Dakota; and “DUI Supervised Probation Program” in Wyoming). These ISPs revealed certain common features: 1. Screening and assessment of offenders for the extent of their alcohol/substance abuse problem; 2. Close monitoring and supervision of the offenders; 3. Encouragement by officials to complete the program requirements successfully; 4. Jail for noncompliance. The authors evaluated three of the programs. The Minnesota Staggered Sentencing Program appeared to be successful in reducing offender recidivism, even given the small sample size of program offenders (n=200). Compared to a similar matched group of DWI offenders, the staggered sentencing offenders had a significant 30.6% lower recidivism rate (p=.017) up to 4 years post-offense. The program prevented an estimated 15 to 23 re-arrests for DWI due to its effectiveness. The Westchester County program appeared to be effective in the short term (18.1% lower recidivism in 5 years post-offense [p<.001]) but not in the long term (only 5.4% [p=.171] lower recidivism in 15 years post-offense). This program resulted in an estimated 78 fewer re-arrests for DWI in the first 5 years. The Oregon DISP intervention group had 54.1% lower recidivism up to 8 years post index offense than both of the stratified matched-sample comparison groups, adjusting for the demographic covariates (Wald=51.50; p>.001). The program prevented 67 re-arrests for DWI in the first 8 years. The benefit/cost of ISPs appears to be very good for the prevention of rearrests. Preventing re-arrest for DWI for multiple offenders saves thousands of dollars in sanctions (jail time) and rehabilitation.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Dec 2011 08:00:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1125332</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Patterns of recidivism related to case dispositions of alcohol-impaired driving offenses</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1104711</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The current study examined the relationship between court outcomes of a first alcohol-impaired driving charge and recidivism. Data on arrests for alcohol-impaired driving offenses (driving under the influence [DUI] and the lesser offense of driving while impaired [DWI]) and associated court dispositions were obtained from the State of Maryland for 1994-2003. Drivers whose first DUI- or DWI-related disposition took place during 1999-2000 were included in analysis. Eighty-two percent of arrests resulted in conviction (29% without probation before judgment [PBJ] and 53% with PBJ); 10 percent of defendants were not prosecuted, 3 percent were acquitted, and all other adjudications combined (e.g., abated by death, failure to appear) accounted for 5 percent. Recidivism was tracked by compiling instances of rearrest for an alcohol-related driving offense during the 3 years following disposition. Approximately 10 percent of all drivers arrested for DUI/DWI recidivated within 3 years after their first disposition, and the rate of recidivism varied by court outcome. The rate of recidivism was lowest (10%) for drivers who were convicted (with or without PBJ), followed by 13 percent for cases not prosecuted and 16 percent for acquittals. After controlling for other factors and relative to drivers who were acquitted, it was estimated that drivers who were not prosecuted were 23 percent less likely to recidivate, whereas drivers who were convicted with or without PBJ were 39 percent less likely to recidivate. Data limitations prevented comparison of recidivism rates for convictions with and without PBJ. Reasons for not prosecuting are unknown, but the findings indicate that the decision is resulting in higher recidivism rates than would occur with prosecution and conviction.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2011 07:27:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1104711</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Violation and Crash Recidivism Among New Jersey Drivers and Effectiveness of New Jersey’s Driver Monitoring and Control System</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1092188</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper presents the results of a study that examined motor vehicle violation and crash recidivism rates among New Jersey Drivers and assessed the effectiveness of New Jersey’s driver monitoring and control system in terms of correcting negligent driving behavior.  As part of the study, the research team obtained and analyzed an extensive longitudinal database of driver history records.  These data included more than 6 million unique driver records encompassing more than 95 million individual events.  This represented a census of all New Jersey drivers with a violation or crash history at the time the data was exported.  This study provides important evidence that New Jersey’s program of negligent driver countermeasures is effective at reducing violation and crash recidivism among most negligent driver subgroups in the two-year period after MVC intervention.  Of the countermeasures used in New Jersey, the combination of license suspension with one-year probation resulted in the greatest overall reduction in both mean violation and crash rates.  New Jersey’s driver re-education classes which are accompanied by a 3-point credit against accumulated demerit points and one-year probation resulted in the lowest mean violation rate reduction. Point advisory notices which are accompanied in New Jersey by a concurrent assessment of negligent driver fees appear to be an effective early intervention, producing substantial reductions in both violation and crash recidivism among all driver subgroups except teen drivers.  The paper concludes with a number of policy recommendations for improving driver management and control in New Jersey.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Mar 2011 11:37:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1092188</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>An Evaluation of Three Intensive Supervision Programs for Serious DWI Offenders</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1084417</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper describes how there are many variations of supervision and probation programs for driving-while-intoxicated (DWI) offenders. These programs include case-specific restrictions (e.g., individualized conditions to probation), unsupervised probation, basic supervision probation (e.g., regularly scheduled visits to probation services with varying frequency), and intensive supervision probation (which may involve many program components and close monitoring). Offenders who receive monitoring through intensive supervision programs (ISPs) have more contact with probation officers, a judge, or other designated authorities compared to standard (nonintensive) probation programs. Three ISPs were evaluated: the Minnesota Staggered Sentencing Program, the Westchester County New York DWI Enforcement Program, and the Oregon Driving under the Influence of Intoxicants (DUII) Intensive Supervision Program (DISP). The Minnesota program appeared to be successful in reducing offender recidivism in a relatively small ISP (n=200 offenders in the program). Compared to a similar matched group of DWI offenders, the staggered sentencing offenders had a significant 30.6% lower recidivism rate (p=.017) up to 4 years post offense. The program prevented an estimated 15 to 23 re-arrests for DWI. Compared to a matched group of offenders, the Westchester County program appeared to be effective in the short term (18.1% lower recidivism in 5 years post offense) but not in the long term (only 5.4% lower recidivism in 15 years post offense). This program resulted in an estimated 78 fewer re-arrests for DWI in the first 5 years. The Oregon DISP intervention group had 54.1% lower recidivism up to 8 years post index offense than both of the stratified matched-sample comparison groups, adjusting for the demographic covariates (Wald=51.50; p>.001). The program prevented 67 re-arrests for DWI in the first 8 years. The benefit/cost of ISPs appears to be very good for the prevention of re-arrests.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Dec 2010 08:31:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1084417</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A longitudinal study of offenders sentenced to probation for felony driving while intoxicated : an event history analysis of recidivism</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/924421</link>
      <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2010 09:39:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/924421</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Study of Recidivism Rates among Drivers Administratively Sanctioned by the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/915909</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The purpose of this study was to examine the current state of practice related to driver improvement countermeasures used in the United States and to assess the effectiveness of New Jersey’s negligent driver interventions. As part of the study, the research team conducted a national literature review and a survey of motor vehicle agency policies in other states to document the current state of practice related to driver improvement programs and the current state of knowledge regarding the effectiveness of specific countermeasures. In addition, the research team obtained and analyzed an extensive longitudinal database of driver history records to examine the effectiveness of various countermeasures used in New Jersey to address negligent driver behavior relative to violation and crash recidivism. This study provides important evidence that New Jersey’s program of negligent driver countermeasures is effective at reducing violation and crash recidivism among most negligent driver subgroups in the two-year period after Motor Vehicle Commission (MVC) intervention. Of the countermeasures used in New Jersey, the combination of license suspension with one-year probation resulted in the greatest overall reduction in both mean violation and crash rates. New Jersey’s driver re-education classes, which are accompanied by a three-point credit against accumulated demerit points and one-year probation, resulted in the lowest mean violation rate reduction. Point advisory notices, which for experienced drivers are accompanied by a concurrent assessment of negligent driver fees (MVC “insurance surcharges”), appear to be an effective early intervention, producing substantial reductions in both violation and crash recidivism among all driver subgroups except teen drivers who are not assessed negligent driver fees at the time of notice issuance. Several policy recommendations can be derived from this research. First, with regard to teen drivers, consideration should be given to whether or not a “zero-tolerance” policy for motor vehicle violations and at-fault crashes should be applied to teen drivers. It may be appropriate to impose license suspension as an earlier intervention if the reforms already enacted do not result in meaningful change in teen driver safety outcomes. Second, MVC should consider streamlining the suspension program to make it more straightforward and easier to administer. Thirdly, consideration should be given to reviewing and reforming New Jersey’s driver monitoring system and/or plea bargaining practices to ensure that repeat traffic offenders are not able to use zero-point plea bargaining to avoid corrective actions that improve safety outcomes.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Apr 2010 16:10:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/915909</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A Large-Scale Study of the Characteristics of Impaired Drivers in Treatment in Texas</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/871604</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This article describes a large-scaled study of the characteristics of impaired drivers in substance abuse treatment in Texas.  The study included 29,566 adult Texans who entered publicly funded substance abuse treatment between 2000 and 2005; all individuals entering treatment had been arrested for DUI in the past year or had entered treatment while on probation for DUI.  The study was undertaken to determine their levels of impairment and the factors that predict treatment completion and abstinence at follow-up.  The data showed that being older, homeless, having more problems with peer or social relationships, using drugs or alcohol daily, and having more public intoxication arrests predicted entering treatment with more than 1 DUI arrest in the past year.  Individuals who had multiple arrests in the past year were more impaired and the least likely to complete treatment or be abstinent in their last month of treatment. The strongest predictor of completing treatment was having been treated in a residential environment, the strongest predictor of past-month abstinence at follow-up was completing treatment, and the strongest risk factor for recidivism was living in a situation in which the individual was exposed to alcohol abuse or drug use.  The authors conclude that this data shows not only the extent of abuse and dependence among DUI arrestees and their need for treatment for their substance abuse problems but also for other problems, including co-occurring mental health problems.  They propose that closer supervision by probation during follow-up could reinforce abstinence and prevent recidivism.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 10:14:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/871604</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Guidelines for the Community Supervision of Impaired Driving Offenders</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/859582</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In 2005 approximately 1.4 million arrests occurred for driving while impaired (DWI), which creates an enormous burden on an already overwhelmed criminal justice system.  Probation, the most common form of sentencing in the United States, was the sentence for approximately 1 million offenders for a drug law violation and about 600,000 for driving while intoxicated.  The vast majority of convicted impaired driving offenders are supervised in the community.  Agencies that provide supervision for DWI offenders in the community require a continuum of supervision options to achieve the concurrent goals of rehabilitation, accountability, and public safety.  The American Probation and Parole Association, under a cooperative agreement with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, has developed guidelines for implementing, developing, and operating effective programs for the community supervision of DWI offenders.  These guidelines are briefly summarized in this Traffic Tech fact sheet.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 16:03:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/859582</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The "Hard Core Drinking Driver": Identification, Treatment, and Community Management</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/842425</link>
      <description><![CDATA[There are some individuals who, despite social pressure, education, threats, and punishments, continue to frequently drive with high blood alcohol concentrations.  This article profiles hard core drinking drivers and offers guidelines for their treatment and management.  The authors stress that it is important that addiction counselors, law enforcement officers, prosecutors, judges, probation officers, and administrative hearing officers recognize this "hard core drinking driver" exists.  Interventions must be structured that can both enhance personal recovery and protect public safety.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Dec 2007 07:37:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/842425</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>