Research Studies & Reports
DMV’s Research & Development Branch has been conducting research and producing studies and reports since the 1950s. Research & Development reports help DMV to measure the impact of new laws on making drivers safer. We also identify areas where we can improve our processes, explore new approaches to solving existing problems, and branch out into new opportunities to serve you better.
Studies & Reports Sections
Studies and reports are assigned to a Section that best describes the type of report. Click on a section title below to see a short description.
I. Driver Education & Training Studies
II. Driver Licensing Screening Studies
III. Studies on Improvement and Control of Deviant Drivers
IV. Basic Research & Methodological Studies: Driver Performance, Accident Etiology, Prediction Models, and Actuarial Applications
V. Driver Licensing / Control Systems & Safety Management Studies
VI. Studies on Special Driver Populations
VII. Miscellaneous Studies & Reports
Request printed copies of studies and reports by mail at:
Department of Motor Vehicles
Research and Development Branch
2415 1st Ave. Mail Station: F-126
Sacramento, CA 95818
(916) 914-8125
Note Please include the report number, the number of copies requested, and your name, address, and phone number.
| Report ID | Date Published | Title | Section | Links |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 89 | 1984/ 03 |
Analysis of DUI Processing from Arrest Through Post-Conviction Countermeasures (Volume 1 of “An Evaluation of the California Drunk Driving Countermeasure System”)(1) To develop process flow charts for the whole DUI system, depicting all elements and decision points concerning drivers, abstracts, and license actions involved in the reporting system, both before and after new legislation (AB 541) became effective on January I, 1982; (2) to describe the whole DUI system from the point of arrest to the driver record file, both before and after AB 541; (3) to identify areas or sources of system inefficiency or modes of circumvention of specified provisions, especially in the post-AB 541 system; and (4) to develop alternate solutions and associated recommendations. |
III | |
| 90 | 1984/ 04 |
The Long-Term Traffic Safety Impact of Pilot Alcohol Abuse Treatment as an Alternative to License Suspensions (Volume 2 of “An Evaluation of the California Drunk Driving Countermeasure System”)To evaluate the long-term traffic safety effects of participating in a Senate Bill (SB) 330 drunk driver program in lieu of receiving a mandatory license suspension or revocation. |
III | |
| IR1 | 1987/ 08 |
Use of Proxy Measures in Evaluating Post licensing Control TreatmentsTo describe and evaluate the usefulness of alternative (accident proxy) measures in traffic safety studies. |
III | |
| NRN033 | 1990/ 10 |
The Identification of High-Risk Drivers through Age-Mediated Point SystemsTo determine if there is quantitative justification for applying age-mediated intervention programs to older drivers. |
III | |
| NRN036 | 1994/ 05 |
Impact on Effectiveness of Level-3 Negligent Driver Actions of Conducting Level-3 Hearings by Phone-A Preliminary AnalysisTo evaluate the impact of conducting hearings by telephone on the effectiveness of Level-3 interventions in the Negligent Operator Treatment System (NOTS). |
III | |
| 105 | 1986/ 03 |
Interim Report to the Legislature of the State of California. The Relationship Between Blood Alcohol Concentration Level and Court Sanction Severity in Drunk Driving CasesTo provide the legislature with tabulations of sanction severity by blood alcohol concentration (BAC) level and license status for first and second DUI offenders, prior and subsequent to the enactment of Assembly Bill (AB) 144 (Naylor, 1985). |
III | |
| 123 | 1989/ 12 |
A Time Series Evaluation of the General Deterrent Effects of California’s 1982 DUI Legislative Reforms (Volume 2 of “Development of a DUI Recidivism Tracking System”)To evaluate the effect of a series of 1982 DUI legislative reforms in deterring drunk driving, as measured by the impact on alcohol-related fatal or injury accident rates. |
III | |
| 129 | 1990/ 12 |
Development, Implementation and Evaluation of a Pilot Project to Better Control Disqualified DriversTo develop and evaluate better measures for controlling suspended or revoked drivers who continue to drive while disqualified. Project tasks included: 1) examining the suspended / revoked driver population and analyzing deficiencies in the license suspension enforcement system that allow disqualified drivers to escape detection, prosecution and conviction of driving while disqualified, 2) developing a pilot program consisting of measures to better control disqualified drivers (implemented in Ventura County, California for a period of 6 months), and 3) analyzing data on system processing of disqualified drivers, and on subsequent accidents and traffic convictions for this group, to provide a measure of the success of the pilot program. |
III | |
| 180 | 1998/ 12 |
An Evaluation of the General Deterrent Effect of Vehicle Impoundment onSuspended and Revoked Drivers in CaliforniaWhile license suspension/revocation have been shown to be effective, it is also known that most suspended/revoked(S/R) drivers violate their S/R order and continue to drive, accruing traffic convictions and becoming involved incrashes. In an attempt to strengthen license actions and to better control S/R and unlicensed drivers, Californiaenacted two laws effective January 1995 which provide for the impoundment/forfeiture of vehicles driven by S/Rand unlicensed drivers. The current study evaluates the general deterrent impact of vehicle impoundment on thecrash rates for the general population of S/R drivers in California, regardless of whether they have been apprehendedand punished for driving-while-suspended.Crash rates for S/R drivers, as well as a control group of non-S/R drivers, were examined over a 5-year periodconsisting of 3 years prior to the implementation of vehicle impoundment/forfeiture and 2 years subsequent.Interrupted time series statistical models used to analyze the data showed that while there was a statisticallysignificant drop in crashes for S/R drivers at the point at which the laws became effective, there was also a significantdrop for control drivers, who shouldn't be affected by the laws since they are not S/R. Additional analyses whichjointly estimated crashes for both S/R and control groups revealed that the drop in crashes for S/R drivers was nolonger statistically significant once the crash rate for control drivers was statistically accounted for. Thus, this studyfailed to find compelling evidence of a general deterrent impact of vehicle impoundment/forfeiture in California. |
III | |
| 223 | 2007/ 04 |
A Traffic Safety Evaluation of California’s Traffic Violator School Citation Dismissal PolicyThis study applied methodological refinements to the 1991 departmental evaluation of the traffic violator school (TVS) citation dismissal policy. This study identified and compared two large samples of drivers either completing a TVS (N = 210,015) or convicted of a traffic citation (N = 168,563). Prior to adjudication, the TVS group had characteristics (e.g., lower prior conviction rate and smaller proportion of males) that were predictive of a lower subsequent crash risk. However, the TVS group exhibited significantly more crashes than did the convicted group in the subsequent one-year period. The difference (4.83%) increased to 10% after adjusting for the more favorable characteristics of the TVS group. The TVS group also had a higher adjusted subsequent crash rate at each prior driver record entry level, reflecting a loss in the general and specific deterrence of the non-conviction masked status of TVS dismissed citations. It was also demonstrated that approximately 15,000 Negligent Operator Treatment System (NOTS) Level 3 (probation/suspension hearings) and 6,000 NOTS Level 4 (probation violator sanctions) interventions are circumvented annually because of TVS dismissals. The demonstrated effectiveness of the NOTS interventions in reducing crash risk of treated drivers assists in explaining why the driving public is exposed to an increased crash risk as a result of their avoidance. A number of recommendations are offered to reduce the negative traffic safety impact of the TVS citation dismissal policy. |
III |