{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021954674220963172, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002124645892351275, 'mean_word_length': 5.760765550239235, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
How can repeat drunk drivers be influenced to change? Analysis of the association between drunk driving and DUI recidivists' attitudes and beliefs.

OBJECTIVE
Public policy interventions designed to deter or prevent drunk driving depend, in part, on modifying beliefs concerning the riskiness, social acceptability and immorality of driving under the influence of alcohol. The current study examines the association of these beliefs with the incidence of alcohol-impaired driving.


METHOD
Interviews were conducted with 273 people with multiple driving under the influence (DUI) offenses. Data included self-reported frequency of driving after drinking in the past year, as well as measures of moral and prescriptive beliefs concerning alcohol-impaired driving (internal behavioral controls), perceived risks of criminal punishment and accidents associated with alcohol-impaired driving (external behavioral controls) and perceived peer group attitudes toward alcohol-impaired driving (social controls).


RESULTS
Logit regression modeling showed significant, unique protective associations with behavioral control items in each category.


CONCLUSIONS
Behavioral controls may protect against alcohol-impaired driving behavior even in a high-risk sample of repeat DUI offenders. Policy interventions designed to curtail drunk driving might seek to enhance these sorts of behavioral controls among DUI offenders.