Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Chang, I.
Right arrow Articles by Davis, J. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Chang, I.
Right arrow Articles by Davis, J. W.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Alcohol and Alcoholism Vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 122-130, 2001
© 2001 Medical Council on Alcoholism

Alcohol use inventory: screening and assessment of first-time driving-while-impaired offenders. II. Typology and predictive validity

I. Chang*, S. C. Lapham, J. C'de Baca and J. W. Davis1

Behavioral Health Research Centre of the Southwest, 6624 Gulton Court NE, Albuquerque, NM 87109 and
1 Division of Government Research, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131, USA

Received 10 August 1999; first review notified 17 August 2000; accepted 17 September 2000

— This study evaluated the use of Alcohol Use Inventory (AUI) for driving-while-impaired (DWI) screening, by determining whether DWI offenders (n = 1644), grouped according to their reported alcohol involvement on the AUI, would have different rates of recidivism in a 5-year follow-up. Cluster analysis using the six second-order scales produced six groups (clusters 1–6) described as the Low-Profile (50%), Alcohol-Preoccupation (14%), Enhanced (22%), Enhanced-Disrupt (9%), Anxious-Disrupt (3%), and High-Profile (1%) types. They were characterized by different sociodemographic profiles. Members of cluster 4 were associated with the highest DWI recidivism rate (40%), committing one or more further DWI, and clusters 5 and 6 were associated with the highest rate of committing two or more DWIs. Rates of subsequent traffic convictions and crashes were, however, not statistically different among the clusters. Predictors of DWI recidivism included male gender, young age, less-educated, high blood-alcohol concentration at arrest, and clusters of 3 and 4. Different typologies indicated that the needs for treatment might be different. Evaluators should keep in mind the strength of AUI, use risk factors identified in the study, and take measures of test-taking defensiveness to enhance overall predictive validity.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Alcohol AlcoholHome page
I. Chang, S. C. Lapham, and K. W. Wanberg
Alcohol use inventory: screening and assessment of first-time driving-while-impaired offenders. I. Reliability and profiles
Alcohol Alcohol., March 1, 2001; 36(2): 112 - 121.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.