THIS PAPER EVALUATES JUDGMENTS OF DRIVER CRASH RESPONSIBILITY TO ESTIMATE ALCOHOL AND DRUG IMPAIRMENT EFFECTS WHEN EXPOSURE DATA ARE UNAVAILABLE TO CALCULATE CRASH RISKS. PREVIOUS STUDIES USING RESPONSIBILITY JUDGMENTS PROVIDED SOME EVIDENCE THAT RESPONSIBILITY IS RELATED TO BAC. OTHER STUDIES, SOME INFERRING RESPONSIBILITY, INDICATED A RELATION BETWEEN RESPONSIBLITY AND RELATIVE CRASH RISK. DATA ARE PRESENTED SHOWING THAT RESPONSIBILITY JUDGMENTS WITH A RATING SCALE HAVE HIGH INTERRATER RELIABILITY, AND SYSTEMATIC RELATIONS WITH BAC SUGGEST SOME VALIDITY IN THE RATINGS. A METHOD IS DEMONSTRATED FOR ESTIMATING RELATIVE CRASH RISK FROM RESPONSIBILITY JUDGMENTS WITH ACCIDENT DATA, AND THE LIMITATIONS OF RESPONSIBILITY ANALYSIS ARE DISCUSSED. WHILE ALCOHOL AND DRUG IMPAIRMENT EFFECTS ARE BEST DETERMINED WITH RELATIVE CRASH RISKS DETERMINED FROM ACCIDENT AND EXPOSURE DATA, RESPONSIBILITY ANALYSIS MAY PROVIDE USEFUL INDICATIONS IN THE ABSENCE OF EXPOSURE DATA. (Author/publisher).
Abstract