2 VARIETIES OF HELPING IN DRUNK-DRIVING INTERVENTION - PERSONAL AND SITUATIONAL FACTORS

Objective: This study examined personal characteristics and contextual factors among college students who had made an attempt to prevent som eone from driving drunk. The study was guided by findings from prior r esearch and the arousal/cost-benefit model of helping. Both passive an d assertive interventions and their efficacy were considered. Method: Questionnaire data were obtained from 338 students; 206 (68%) had inte rvened in a DUI situation (63% women). Self-reports of the person (e.g ., moral obligation), the situation (e.g., perceived danger) and the t ype (passive, assertive) and success of the interventions were gathere d. Results: Of all interventions used 73% were successful; the median number of interventions used was three. Of the assertive interventions used in DUI situations 57% were successful compared to 47% of the pas sive interventions. Path analyses revealed that being older relative t o the intervenee and greater sobriety of the intervenor predicted more interventions of both types. Personal commitment to intervention, amo unt of perceived danger and less alcohol consumption increased asserti ve interventions, whereas talking with someone about the potential DUI person increased the number of passive interventions. The success of both passive and assertive interventions were dependent upon the numbe r of each of these interventions used. However, the more passive inter ventions were attempted, the less likely the success of an assertive i ntervention. Conclusions: The current findings extend our understandin g of the psychosocial factors associated with informal DUI interventio n, particularly concerning the choice and success of passive versus as sertive interventions. Several of these significant predictors support laboratory research findings on helping and the arousal/cost-benefit model, while others do not.