Academic Journal
View in EDS

Within-Person and Between-Person Risk Perceptions Predict Driving After Drinking: An Ecological Momentary Assessment Study.

Bibliographic Details
Title: Within-Person and Between-Person Risk Perceptions Predict Driving After Drinking: An Ecological Momentary Assessment Study.
Authors: Darmour CA; Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA., Benvenuti MC; Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA., Stork JG; Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA., Hough TM; Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA., McCarthy DM; Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA.
Source: Alcohol, clinical & experimental research [Alcohol Clin Exp Res (Hoboken)] 2026 Jun; Vol. 50 (6), pp. e70355.
Publication Type: Journal Article
Language: English
Journal Info: Publisher: Wiley Periodicals Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 9918609780906676 Publication Model: Print Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 2993-7175 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 29937175 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Alcohol Clin Exp Res (Hoboken) Subsets: MEDLINE
Imprint Name(s): Original Publication: Hoboken, NJ : Wiley Periodicals, [2023]-
MeSH Terms: Alcohol Drinking*/psychology , Alcoholic Intoxication*/psychology , Automobile Driving*/psychology , Driving Under the Influence*/psychology , Ecological Momentary Assessment* , Perception* , Risk-Taking*, Adult ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Young Adult ; Breath Tests ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Abstract: Background: Alcohol-impaired driving (AID) remains a significant public health concern, accounting for approximately 30% of vehicle fatalities annually in the United States. Despite widely negative attitudes toward AID, many adults report driving after drinking. Day-to-day changes in how people think about AID may explain this inconsistency. This study used ecological momentary assessment (EMA) to examine how both stable patterns and day-to-day changes in perceived danger of driving, willingness to drive, and subjective intoxication predict real-world driving after drinking.
Methods: Participants (N = 113) from a Midwestern community completed six weeks of EMA data collection. Daily morning surveys assessed the previous night's drinking and transportation decisions, while repeated evening surveys measured perceived danger of driving, willingness to drive, subjective intoxication, and breath alcohol concentration (BrAC) using portable breathalyzer devices. Mixed-effects models examined day- and person-level cognitions as predictors of driving behavior while accounting for alcohol consumption via BrAC.
Results: Participants reported driving on nearly half of drinking days. On days when people perceived driving as more dangerous and felt more intoxicated than usual, they were less likely to drive. Moreover, on days when people were more willing to drive than usual, they were more likely to drive. These patterns held after accounting for BrAC. Additionally, people who typically experience stronger subjective effects of alcohol were less likely to drive on days when their breathalyzer readings were high (BrAC ≥ 0.05%).
Conclusions: Day-to-day changes in how people perceive the dangers of driving and how intoxicated they feel predict whether they drive after drinking, even at high BrAC. People who typically experience strong subjective effects from alcohol appear especially responsive to objective indicators of high intoxication levels. Findings support developing real-time interventions that combine subjective feelings of intoxication with objective measures such as breathalyzers to promote safer transportation choices.
Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03846050.
(© 2026 Research Society on Alcohol.)
References: Amlung, M. T., D. H. Morris, and D. M. McCarthy. 2014. “Effects of Acute Alcohol Tolerance on Perceptions of Danger and Willingness to Drive After Drinking.” Psychopharmacology 231: 4271–4279.
Baum, S. 2000. “Drink Driving as a Social Problem: Comparing the Attitudes and Knowledge of Drink Driving Offenders and the General Community.” Accident Analysis & Prevention 32: 689–694.
Beirness, D. J. 1987. “Self‐Estimates of Blood Alcohol Concentration in Drinking‐Driving Context.” Drug and Alcohol Dependence 19: 79–90.
Beirness, D. J., R. D. Foss, and R. B. Voas. 1993. “Drinking Drivers' Estimates of Their Own Blood Alcohol Concentration.” Journal of Traffic Medicine 21: 73–78.
Bingham, C. R., M. R. Elliott, and J. T. Shope. 2007. “Social and Behavioral Characteristics of Young Adult Drink/Drivers Adjusted for Level of Alcohol Use.” Alcoholism, Clinical and Experimental Research 31: 655–664.
Blincoe, L. J., T. R. Miller, E. Zaloshnja, and B. A. Lawrence. 2015. “The Economic and Societal Impact of Motor Vehicle Crashes, 2010 (Revised).” National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality [CBHSQ]. 2018. 2017 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Detailed Tables. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA).
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC]. 2022. “Impaired Driving: Get the Facts [Online].” https://www.cdc.gov/transportationsafety/impaired_driving/impaired‐drv_factsheet.html.
Davis, K. C., C. S. Hendershot, W. H. George, J. Norris, and J. R. Heiman. 2007. “Alcohol's Effects on Sexual Decision Making: An Integration of Alcohol Myopia and Individual Differences.” Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs 68: 843–851.
Davis‐Stober, C. P., K. N. McCarty, and D. M. McCarthy. 2019. “Decision Making and Alcohol: Health Policy Implications.” Policy Insights From the Behavioral and Brain Sciences 6: 64–71.
Delgado, M. K., F. Shofer, R. Wetherill, et al. 2021. “Accuracy of Consumer‐Marketed Smartphone‐Paired Alcohol Breath Testing Devices: A Laboratory Validation Study.” Alcoholism, Clinical and Experimental Research 45: 1091–1099.
Drew, L., D. Royal, B. Moulton, A. Peterson, and D. Haddix. 2010. “National Survey of Drinking and Driving Attitudes and Behaviors: 2008: Volume 1: Summary Report.” National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
Eby, D. W., L. J. Molnar, L. P. Kostyniuk, et al. 2017. “Perceptions of Alcohol‐Impaired Driving and the Blood Alcohol Concentration Standard in the United States.” Journal of Safety Research 63: 73–81.
Fell, J. C., and R. B. Voas. 2014. “The Effectiveness of a 0.05 Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC) Limit for Driving in the United States.” Addiction 109: 869–874.
Fillmore, M. T., and N. Van Dyke. 2020. “DUI Offenders Display Reduced Perception of Intoxication and Heightened Impulsive Choice in Response to Alcohol.” Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology 28: 337–347.
Fromme, K., E. J. D'Amico, and E. C. Katz. 1999. “Intoxicated Sexual Risk Taking: An Expectancy or Cognitive Impairment Explanation?” Journal of Studies on Alcohol 60: 54–63.
Fromme, K., E. Katz, and E. D'Amico. 1997. “Effects of Alcohol Intoxication on the Perceived Consequences of Risk Taking.” Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology 5: 14–23.
Haney, A. M., O. M. Warner, S. D. McMullin, C. A. Motschman, T. J. Trull, and D. M. McCarthy. 2024. “Using Mobile Technology to Influence Alcohol‐Impaired Driving Risk Perceptions and Decisions.” Psychology of Addictive Behaviors 38: 47–55.
KHN Solutions Inc. 2018. “BACtrack Mobile Smartphone Breathalyzer [Online].” San Francisco, CA. https://www.bactrack.com/products/bactrack‐mobilesmartphone‐breathalyzer.
Laude, J. R., and M. T. Fillmore. 2016. “Drivers Who Self‐Estimate Lower Blood Alcohol Concentrations Are Riskier Drivers After Drinking.” Psychopharmacology 233: 1387–1394.
Liguori, A., R. B. D'Agostino Jr., S. I. Dworkin, D. Edwards, and J. H. Robinson. 1999. “Alcohol Effects on Mood, Equilibrium, and Simulated Driving.” Alcoholism, Clinical and Experimental Research 23: 815–821.
Maisto, S. A., M. P. Carey, K. B. Carey, and C. M. Gordon. 2002. “The Effects of Alcohol and Expectancies on Risk Perception and Behavioral Skills Relevant to Safer Sex Among Heterosexual Young Adult Women.” Journal of Studies on Alcohol 63: 476–485.
McCarthy, D. M., K. N. McCarty, L. E. Hatz, C. J. Prestigiacomo, S. Park, and C. P. Davis‐Stober. 2021. “Applying Bayesian Cognitive Models to Decisions to Drive After Drinking.” Addiction 116: 1424–1430.
McCarthy, D. M., and S. L. Pedersen. 2009. “Reciprocal Associations Between Drinking‐and‐Driving Behavior and Cognitions in Adolescents.” Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs 70: 536–542.
Morris, D. H., H. R. Treloar, M. E. Niculete, and D. M. McCarthy. 2014. “Perceived Danger While Intoxicated Uniquely Contributes to Driving After Drinking.” Alcoholism, Clinical and Experimental Research 38: 521–528.
Morrison, W., L. Guerdan, J. Kanugo, T. Trull, and Y. Shang. 2018. “TigerAware: An Innovative Mobile Survey and Sensor Data Collection and Analytics System.” 2018 IEEE Third International Conference on Data Science in Cyberspace, 115–122.
Motschman, C. A., L. E. Hatz, K. N. McCarty, E. C. Merkle, T. J. Trull, and D. M. McCarthy. 2020. “Event‐Level Predictors of Alcohol‐Impaired Driving Intentions.” Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs 81: 647–654.
National Center For Statistics and Analysis. 2025. “Alcohol‐Impaired Driving: 2023 Data.” National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
National Transportation Safety Board. 2013. Reaching Zero: Actions to Eliminate Alcohol‐Impaired Driving. National Transportation Safety Board.
Paschall, M. J. 2003. “College Attendance and Risk‐Related Driving Behavior in a National Sample of Young Adults.” Journal of Studies on Alcohol 64: 43–49.
Piquero, A. R., and R. Paternoster. 1998. “An Application of Stafford and Warr's Reconceptualization of Deterrence to Drinking and Driving.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 35: 3–39.
Quinn, P. D., and K. Fromme. 2012. “Event‐Level Associations Between Objective and Subjective Alcohol Intoxication and Driving After Drinking Across the College Years.” Psychology of Addictive Behaviors 26: 384–392.
Richards, V. L., R. J. Turrisi, and M. A. Russell. 2024. “Subjective Intoxication Predicts Alcohol‐Related Consequences at Equivalent Alcohol Concentrations in Young Adults Using Ecological Momentary Assessment and Alcohol Sensors.” Psychology of Addictive Behaviors 38: 334–346.
Riordan, B. C., D. Scarf, S. Moradi, J. A. M. Flett, K. B. Carey, and T. S. Conner. 2017. “The Accuracy and Promise of Personal Breathalysers for Research: Steps Toward a Cost‐Effective Reliable Measure of Alcohol Intoxication?” Digital Health 3: 2055207617746752.
Rossheim, M. E., A. E. Barry, D. L. Thombs, et al. 2017. “Factors Associated With Self‐Estimated Breath Alcohol Concentration Among Bar Patrons.” Alcoholism, Clinical and Experimental Research 41: 1492–1501.
Scaglione, N. M., R. Turrisi, N. M. Sell, K. A. Mallett, and M. J. Cleveland. 2022. “An Ecological Momentary Assessment of College Women's Decisions to Use Protective Behavioral Strategies.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 37: NP13291–NP13314.
Shults, R. A., R. W. Elder, D. A. Sleet, et al. 2001. “Reviews of Evidence Regarding Interventions to Reduce Alcohol‐Impaired Driving.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine 21: 66–88.
Grant Information: R01 AA019546 United States AA NIAAA NIH HHS; T32 AA013526 United States AA NIAAA NIH HHS
Contributed Indexing: Keywords: alcohol consequences; alcohol‐impaired driving; drinking and driving; ecological momentary assessment; subjective intoxication
Molecular Sequence: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03846050
Entry Date(s): Date Created: 20260612 Date Completed: 20260613 Latest Revision: 20260726
Update Code: 20260726
PubMed Central ID: PMC13329944
DOI: 10.1111/acer.70355
PMID: 42281262
Database: MEDLINE
Description
ISSN:2993-7175
DOI:10.1111/acer.70355