[PDF] An Evaluation of the Changes in the Legal Drinking Ages in

PDF



Previous PDF Next PDF





Impact Assessment of Arizonas Lowered Legal Drinking Age

1983 · Cité 1 fois — In August of 1972, the Arizona State Legislature lowered the minimum legal drinking age from 21 to 19 years, Evaluations of similar drinking age changes have produced important results



Legal Age To - Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and

Liquor Laws (Updated April 2019) Topic Legal Age Statute/Rule Legal drinking age 21



Arizona lawmaker wants to lower alcohol serving age to 18

An Arizona state lawmaker has introduced legislation that would allow 18-year-olds to serve alcohol at restaurants and bars The bill, introduced by State Rep Jeff Weninger (R-Chandler), would lower the minimum age from 19 to 18 for both servers and bartenders The bill does not change the legal drinking age of 21







ARIZONA GAMBLING LAWS TITLE 4 ALCOHOLIC

it or charitable organizations for purposes of charitable fund raising which are issued special event age, or for a person under the legal drinking age to buy, receive, have in 



pdf Legal Age To Arizona Liquor Laws

Age to be in bar (exceptions) w/ spouse guardian parent of legal drinking age A R S

[PDF] army language codes qb

[PDF] array instance variable javascript

[PDF] array of array in javascript

[PDF] array size in javascript

[PDF] arraylist object java example

[PDF] arrêter les paris sportifs

[PDF] arrhenius equation calculator

[PDF] arris vip2262 hard reset

[PDF] arrivée en france quarantaine obligatoire

[PDF] arrivees aeroport biarritz

[PDF] art curriculum ontario grade 9

[PDF] arthur furniture store

[PDF] article 16 constitution france

[PDF] article 173 vi france

[PDF] article about new york times

An Evaluation of the Changes in the Legal Drinking Ages in

Michigan

Tuhicol Rqort Docuni~tati'om Page

I. Rqod No.

UM HSRI-80-67

9. Puking Orpmiaution Nme ad Address 1 10. Work Unit No.

2. Cormmmt Accession No.

' 7. Authds)

Alexander C. Wagenaar, Richard I. Douqlass

4. Title end Subtitle 5. Repert Date

8. Perbrming Orgar~xation Repor? NO.

UM-HSRI-80-67

Highway Safety Research Institute The University

of Michigan

Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109

12. $onsoring Agency Nre cnd Addr***

16. Abstroct

Michigan reduced its drinking age from 21 to 18 in 1972. Several studies have reported significant increases in alcohol -related traffic crashes among drivers affected by the lower drinking age. Michigan raised the

drinking age from 18 to 21 in December 1978. This investigation measured the effect of the 1978 increase in the legal drinking age in Michigan on the frequency of

a1 coho1 -re1 ated traffic crash involvement among young drivers.

A 20 percent random sample of all reported motor vehicle crashes in the State of Michigan from 1972 through 1979 was analyzed. Monthly time-series

of these measures were examined for drivers aged 16-17, 18-20, 21-24, and

25-45 using the Box-Jenkins time-series analysis methods. The analyses con-

trol led for long-term trends, seasonality, and other patterns in crash fre- quency expected to influence the 1979 data.

A1 1 age groups had reductions in non-alcohol -related crashes in 1979. Alcohol -related crashes increased sl ightly for drivers aged

21-45, while

these crashes decreased significantly for the 18-20-year-old drivers, who were directly affected by a higher legal drinking age (21) in 1979, 16-17-

year-old alcohol -related crashes a1 so decreased in 1979. The reductions in general non-alcohol -related crash frequencies, for

a1 1 ages, were too small to account for the siqnificant reduction in alcohol-related crash incidence

11. Contract or Gront NO. 13. Type of Report and Period Cowered

October 1, 1979-

The Office of Substance Abuse Services,

Michigan Department

of Pub1 ic Health, Lansing, Michigan 48906 for 18-20-year-01 d drivers.

17. Key Words 18. Distribution

Stotu.nt ~e~tember -30, 1980

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

IS. Suppl-tay Notes

Legal Drinking Age, Traffic Acci- dents, Alcohol

Availabil ity, Time-

Series Analysis, Public Health, Youth and Alcohol

Unclassified Unclassified

21- No. of Pages

21 8

22. Prtcc

TABLE OF CONTENTS

......................... LIST OF TABLES v

LIST OF FIGURES ........................ ix

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

.........,.............. xi i

1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................... 1

2.0

BACKGROUND LITERATURE, THEORY, AND DEVELOPMENT OF

HYPOTHESES

........................ 7

2.1 Alcohol and Highway Safety Among Youth

2.2 The Legal Drinking Age and Highway Safety

2.3 Conceptual Models for the Prevention of

Alcohol

-re1 ated Problems

2.4 Specification of Hypotheses

3.0 RESEARCH DESIGN AND DATA ANALYSIS METHODS

......... 51

3.1 Research Design

3.2

Operationalization and Data Collection

3.3 Design Validity

3.4 Data Analysis Methods

4.0 RESULTS

.......................... 77

4.1 An Example of the Box-Jenkins Method: Three-factor-

surrogate Crash Frequency Among Drivers

Aged 18-20

4.2

Time-series Models of Michigan Total Crash

Frequencies, 1972-1

979

4.3 Time-series Models of Michigan Fatal Crash

Frequencies, 1968-1

979

5.0 THE RAISED LEGAL DRINKING AGE AND AGGREGATE ALCOHOL

CONSUMPTION IN MICHIGAN

.................. 135

5.1 Literature Review

5.2 Method

5.3 Results

5.4 Discussion

6.0 SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS .................. 157

6.1 Summary of Findings

6.2 Recomendati ons for Research

6.3 Recomnendations for Pub1 ic Pol icy

iii APPENDIX A: Baseline ARIM Time-series Model Estimation

Results

..................... 169

APPENDIX B: Designvalidity ................. 181

REFERENCES .......................... 207

TAB L.ES

3.1 Full Design Matrix Depicting Age Groups, Type of Accidents,

and Operationalized Measures Used ........ 53 4.1 ARIMA Model Estimation Results for the Frequency of

Three-factor-surrogate Crash Involvement

Among 18-20 Year Old Drivers in Michigan

................ 83

4.2 Initial Estimation Resul ts for Combi ned

ARIMAI

Transfer Function Model of Three-factor-surrogate Crash Frequency Among Drivers Aged 18-20 .......... 86

4.3 Final Estimation Results for Combined

ARIMAITransfer

Function Model of Three-factor-surrogate Crash Frequency

Among Drivers Aged 18-20 ............. 88

4.4 Final Estimation Results for Combined

ARIMAITransfer

Function Model of Had-been-drinking Crash Frequency

Among Drivers Aged 18-20 .................. 95

4.5 Final Estimation Results for Combined

ARIMAITransfer

Function Model of Three-factor-surrogate Crash

............. Frequency Among Drivers Aged 16-17 97

4.6 Final Estimation Results for Combined ARIMAITransfer

Function Model of Reported Had-been-drinking Crash Frequency

Among Drivers Aged 16-17 ............. 99

4.7 Final Estimation Results for

Ctambined ARIMA/Transfer

Function Model of Reported Had-not-been drinking

.......... Crash Frequency Among Drivers Aged 18-20 101

4.8 Final Estimation Resul ts for Combined

ARIMAITransfer

Function Model of Reported Had-not-been drinking

.......... Crash Frequency Among Drivers Aged 16-17 103

4.9 Final Estimation Results for Combined

ARIMAITransfer

Function Model of Three-factor-surrogate Crash Frequency Among Drivers Aged 21-24 ............. 105

4.10 Final Estimation Results for

Combined ARIMAITransfer

Function Model of Reported Had-been-drinki ng Crash ............. Frequency Among Drivers Aged 2'1-24 107

4.11 Final Estimation Results for Combined ARIMA/Transfer

Function Model of Three-factor-surrogate Crash

............ Frequency Among Drivers Aged 25-45 109

4.12 Final Estimation

Resul ts for Combined ARIMA/Transfer

Function Model of Reported Had-been-drinking Crash Frequency Among Drivers Aged 25-45 ............ 111

4.13 Final Estimation Results for Combined

ARIMA/Transfer

Function Model of Reported Had-not-been-drinki ng Crash Frequency Among Drivers Aged 21-24 11 3

4.14 Final Estimation Results for Combined

ARIMA/Transfer

Function Model of Reported Had-not-been-drinking Crash Frequency Among Drivers Aged 25-45 115
4.15

Summary of Transfer Function Estimates of the Impact of the Raised Legal Drinking Age on a 20 Percent Random Sample of Motor Vehicle Crashes in Michigan

116
5.1

Estimated Baseline Model of Packaged

Beer Distribu-

........ tion: January 1969 Through December 1978 143

5.2 Comparison of Forecasted and Actual Packaged Beer Distribution: January 1979 Through February 1980

..... 144

5.3 Estimated

Base1 ine Model of Draught Beer Distribution: January 1969 Through December 1978 ............ 148 5.4 Comparison of Forecasted and Actual Draught Beer Distribution: January 1979 Through February 1980 ..... 149

5.5 Estimated

Base1 ine Model of Wine Distribution: January 1969 Through December 1978 ............ 151 5.6 Comparison of Forecasted and Actual Wine Distribution: January 1969 Through February 1980 ............ 152

A.l ARIMA Model Estimation Results for the Frequency of Had-been-drinking Crash Invol vement Among 18-20 Year

01 d Drivers in Michigan ................. 170

A.2 ARIMA Model Estimation Results for the Frequency of Three-factor-surrogate Crash Involvement Among 16-17

............... Year Old Drivers in Michigan 171

A.3 ARIMA Model Estimation Results for the Frequency of Had-been-drinking Crash Involvement Among 16-1

7 Year

................. Old Drivers in Michigan 172 A.4 ARIMA Model Estimation Results for the Frequency of Had-not-been-drin ki ng Crash

Invol vement Among 18-20

................ Year Old Drivers in Michigan 173 A.5 ARIMA Model Estimation Results for the Frequency of Had-not-been-drinking Crash Involvement

Among 16-1 7

Year Old Drivers in Michigan ................ 174 A.6 ARIMA Model Estimation Results for the Frequency of

Three-factor-surrogate Crash Involvement

Among 21 -24 Year Old Drivers in Michigan

................ 175 A.7 ARIMA Model Estimation Results for the Frequency of Had-been-drinking Crash Involvement

Among 21 -24 Year Old Drivers in Michigan

.................. 176 A.8 ARIMA Model Estimation Results for the Frequency of Three-factor-surrogate Crash Involvement

Among 25-45

................ Year Old Drivers in Michigan 177 A.9 ARIMA Model Estimation Results for the Frequency of Had-been-drin ki ng Crash Invol vfement Among 25-45 Year

Old Drivers in Michigan .................. 178

A.10 ARIMA Model Estimation Results for the Frequency of Had-not-been-drinking Crash Invol vement

Among 21-24 Year Old Drivers in Michigan

................ 779 A.ll ARIMA Model Estimation Results for the Frequency of Had-not-been-drinking Crash Involvement

Among 25-45 Year Old Drivers in Michigan

................ 180

FIGURES

Major Categories of Causal

Factors in Motor-vehicle

Collisions

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Environmental Causal Factors in Motor-vehicle Coll isions . . 12 Vehicular Causal Factors in Motor-vehicle Collisions . . . . 13 Human Direct Causes in Motor-vehicle Collisions . . . . . . 15 Human Conditions and States Identified as Causal Influences in Motor-vehicle Coll isions . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Human Predisposing Factors for Motor-vehicle Col

1 ision

Involvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

The Bimodal Model of Alcohol Consumption

. . . . . . . . . . 32 The Single Distribution Mode1 of Alcohol Consumption . . . . 36 Conceptual Model of the Impact of Changes in the Legal Drinking Age on Motor-vehicle Crash Involvement . . . . . . 41 Negative Impact Pattern Estimated by the rsb (1,0,0) Transfer Function Model With a Step Function Input . . . . . 68 Positive Impact Pattern Estimated by the rsb (1,0,0) Transfer Function Model With a Step Function Input . . . . . 68 Negative Impact Pattern Estimated by the rsb (0,0,0) Transfer Function Model With a Step Function Input . . . . . 69 Positive Impact Pattern Estimated by the rsb (0,0,0) Transfer Function Model With a Step Function Input . . . . . 69

Negative Impact Pattern

Estimatzed by the rsb (l,0,0)

Transfer Function Model With a Pulse Function Input . . . . 71

Positive Impact Pattern Estimated

by the rsb (1,0,0) Transfer Function Model With a Pulse Function Input . . . . 71 Frequency of Three-factor-surrogate Crash Involvement Among 18-20 Year Old Drivers in Michigan,

1972-1978 . . . . 78

4.2 Autocorrelation Function of the Frequency of Three-factor- surrogate Crash Involvement Among 18-20 Year Old Drivers

8 0

4.3 Partial Autocorrelation Function of the Frequency of Three-factor-surrogate Crash Involvement Among 18-20 Year Old Drivers

8 1

4.4 Frequency of Three-factor-surrogate Crash Involvement Among 18-20 Year Old Drivers in Michigan, 1972-1979

.... 89

4.5 Actual and Predicted Frequency of Three-factor-surrogate Crash Involvement Among 15-20 Year Old Drivers

in Michigan,

1973-1979 ......................... 90

4.6 Frequency of Had-been-drinking Crash Involvement Among 18-20 Year Old Drivers in Michigan, 1972-1979

....... 9 4

4.7 Frequency of Three-factor-surrogate Crash Involvement Among 16-17 Year Old

Drivers in Michigan, 1972-1979 .... 9 6

4.8 Frequency of Had-been-drinki ng Crash Involvement Among 16-17 Year Old Drivers

in Michigan, 1972-1979 ....... 9 8

4.9 Frequency of Had-been-drinki ng Crash Involvement Among 18-20 Year Old Drivers in Michigan,

1972-1979 ....... 100

4.10 Frequency of Had-not-been-drinking Crash Invol vement Among 16-17 Year Old Drivers in Michigan,

1972-1979 .... 102

4.7 1 Frequency of Three-%factor-surrogate Crash Invol

vemen t Among 21-24 Year Old Drivers in Michigan, 1972-1979 .... 104

4.12 Frequency of Had-been-drinking Crash Invol vement Among 21-24 Year Old Drivers

in Michigan, 1972-1979 ....... 106

4.13 Frequency of Three-factor-surrogate Crash Involvement Among 25-45 Year Old Drive-rs in Michigan, 1972-1979

.... 108

4.14 Frequench of Had-been-dri nki ng Crash Invol vement Among 25-45 Year Old Drivers

in Michigan, 1972-1979 ....... 7 10

4.15 Frequency of Had-not-been drinking Crash Invol vemen

t .... Among 21-24 Year Old Drivers in Michigan, 1972-1979 112

4.16 Frequency of Had-not-been Drinking Crash Involvement Among 25-45 Year Old Drivers

in Michigan, 1972-1979 .... 114

4.17 Frequency of Three-factor-surrogate Fatal Crash Involve-

ment Among 18-20 Year Old Drivers in Michigan, 1968-1979 . . 123 Frequency of Total Fatal Crash Involvement Among 18-20 Year Old Drivers in Michigan, 1968-1979 . . . . . . . . . . 124

Frequency of Three-factor-surrogate Fatal Crash Involvement Among 16-17 Year Old Drivers in Michigan,

1968-1979

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 Frequency of Total Fatal Crash Involvement Among 16-17

Year Old Drivers in Michigan,

1968-1979 . . . . . . . . . . 126

Frequency of Three-factor-surrogate Fata

1 Crash Involvement Among 21-24 Year Old

Dri~ers in Michigan,

1968-1979

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127

Frequency of Total Fatal Crash Invol

vement Among 21-24 Year Old Drivers in Michigan, 1968-1979 . . . . . . . . . . 128

Frequency of Three-factor-surrogate Fatal Crash

Involvement Among 25-45 Year Old

Drivers in Michigan, 1 968-1 979

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 Frequency of Total Fatal Crash Involvement 4mong 25-45 Year Old Drivers in Michigan, 1968-1979 . . . . . . . . . . 130 Wholesale Distribution of Packaged Beer in the State of Michigan: January 1969

Through February 1980 . . . . . . . 142

Wholesale Distribution of Draught Beer in

the State of Michigan: January 1969 Through February 1980 . . . . . . . 147 Wholesale Distribution of Wine in the State of Michigan: January 1969 Through February 1980 . . . . . . . . . . . . 150

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We wish to acknowledge the contributions of those whose assistance was essential for completion of this project. The princi- pal data were provided by the Michigan Department of State Police and were processed for our use by the Computing Service staff of the

Highway Safety Research Institute. Charles

Compton, in particular,

provided ongoing consultation and service during the critical stages of crash data file preparation.

Th~e beer and wine distribution data

were kindly provided by the Michigan Beer and Wine Wholesaler's

Association.

Patty

GeBiasi provided assistance with the review of

the

1 i terature.

A1 though many individuals provided assistance and advice throughout the project period, the fi ndi ngs, concl usi ons , opinions, and recommendations are ours and not necessarily those of the Office of Substance Abuse Services,

Flichigiln Department of Public Health,

or the Highway Safety Research Institute of The University of

Michigan.

September

, 1 980

A1 exander C. blagenaar, M. S. W.

Richard L. Douglass, M.P.H., Ph.D.

Ann Arbor, Michigan

DISCLAIMER

The findings, concl

us i ons , and recommendations contained in this report are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Office of Substance Abuse Services, Michigan Department of Public Health, or the Highway Safety

Research Institute

of The University of Michigan.

110 1NTRODUCTIC)N

The minimum age at which beverage alcohol may be legally purchased and consumed has be~n a major political issue in the United States during the past decade, The current controversy began in

1'370 when

the 26th amendment to the

US, Constitution, extending the right to vote

in federal ~lectic?ns to citizens between 18 and 21 years of age, was passed by Congress and rapidly ratified by the necessary Sr8 states, Thequotesdbs_dbs17.pdfusesText_23